Skip to main content

Full text of "An inquiry into the nature and history of Greek and Latin poetry; more particularly of the dramatic species: tending to ascertain the laws of comic metre in both those languages; to show, I. that poetical licences have no real existence, but are mere corruptions; II. that the verses of Plautus, Terence, Pindar, and Horace, are in many instances erroneously regulated; and to suggest a more rational and musical division of the verses"

See other formats
















Cfje ©ramattc Species: 




I. That Poetical Licences have no real Existence, but are 

mere Corruptions ; 

II. That the Verses of Plautus, Terence, Pindar, and 
Horace, are in many Instances erroneously regulated ; 





Printed by S. Gosnell, Little Queen Street, 






* /*«xxoy rpsVoyTa*.'— Thucydides, edit. Hudson, fo. Oxon, 
1696, p. 12. 

' Res sine Industria multis Investigatio Veritatis, ac ad ilia quae 
< in promptu sunt magis vertuntur.'— Ibid. p. 12. 

* Hsec enim duo Inventioni Veritatis plurimum adversantur, si 

* aut vera dicenti quis succenseat, aut pertinaciter in Falsi- 
' tatis defensione laboret.* — Joannis Sarisburiensis Poly- 
craticus, 12mo. Lugd. Bat. 1595, p. 365, 

* Lex vera atque princeps, apta ad jubendum et ad vetandum> 

* est Ratio recta.' — Cicero, Be Legib. 

« In re magna vincat Ratio Authoritatem.' — Plinius, Jul. 1. 1. 

* Difficilius est Oratione uti, quam Versibus ; quod illis quidera 

1 certa et definita lex est, quam sequi sit necesse/ &c«— 
Cicero, Orator, 

A 3 


The present Work may be truly sg-id to rest on 
the following very plain, and almost self-evident 
conclusions ; 

That the laws of Poetry are founded in Reason 
and good Sense, and are to be tried by those 
tests ; that they are not the result of Caprice, but 
of deliberate Judgment, and Experience of what is 
best ; and that the quantities of syllables have a 
real and solid foundation in the nature of Pronun- 
ciation itself; 

That the principles of Music must be consi- 
dered as the foundation of the laws of Poetry : 

That those principles allow an exchange of any 
measure for all equivalent quantities, in whatever 
order the long and short quantities occur : 

That this rule is in part acknowledged in Latin 
Poetry, by the admission of the Spondee, in ex- 
change for the Dactyl, in Hexameter verse : 

a 4 


That it ought to be further extended ; because 
actual instances of such an extension occur in the 
writings of Homer, Virgil, and Horace : 

That, as there is no ground, from Experience 
or Reason, to suppose that Plautus or Terence in- 
tended to use Variety of Verse, either in length or 
nature, especially in the same scene, it is rational 
to imagine they designed that all their Verses 
should be of the same sort ; 

That, as some of the Verses in both those au- 
thors have been decidedly shown to be, not Iam- 
bic, but Bacchiac, because they contradict the 
rules of the former, and agree with those of the 
latter, there is every foundation to conclude they 
meant Bacchiac to be the kind they employed ; 

And that, consequently, such Verses as will 
scan both ways, either as Iambic Trimeter, or 
Bacchiac Tetrameter, are to be considered as 
Bacchiac : 

That Poetical Licences, as being deviations 
from rules and restrictions established to promote 
excellence and prevent deformity, are absurd and 
contradictory to Reason ; 

And that the extension of the principle, in the 
manner above mentioned, will entirely remove all 


supposed Poetical Licences, which, indeed, have 
no real existence, and reduce the principles of 
Poetry to a few simple rules, resting* on a rational 
ground, a recommendation of which they have hi* 
therto been destitute. 

Most of these propositions must be allowed to be 
self-evident, and as such they can never be shaken 
by conjectures or opinions of any Grammarians or 
Critics, whether ancient or modern; men, ignorant 
of the principles of Music, on which Poetry itself 
rests, and biassed in their judgment by an errone- 
ous system, traditionally delivered in the course 
of their education. What Cicero has said of the 
Philosophers, ' Nescio quomodo nihil tarn absurde 
6 dici potest, quod non dicatur ab aliquo Philoso- 
( phorum,' applies with equal truth to the Gram- 
marians and Critics of all ages. No error or pro- 
position has been too gross or absurd to be ad- 
vanced and maintained by them ; and the ensuing 
pages of this Work will exhibit instances of their 
ignorance and rashness, sufficient, both in number 
and importance, to destroy entirely, with all can- 
did and judicious persons, the vain and unfounded 
pretensions of both Grammarians and Critics to 
superiority of Sagacity or Intellect. 


Conclusions, fairly deducible from such prin«- 
ciples as those before stated, neither derive, nor 
need, any support or assistance from great names ; 
on a far better foundation, the broad basis of 
Truth, Reason, and Justice, they rest their claim 
for adoption. They decline not, but solicit, minute 
scrutiny and investigation, conducted, as all in** 
quiries ought to be, on the fair ground of Justice 
and Candour. The more they are examined, the 
stronger they will be found. Every other system, 
as yet known, has, on experiment, failed ; but 
these, without reference to rules which contradict 
common Sense, such as Poetical Licences, for in-? 
stance, will remove, or fully account for, every 
appearance of irregularity or deviation from rule. 
And, as they are so closely connected with the 
very nature and essence of Poetry itself, that they 
form the basis of it in every language whatever, 
they are manifestly the only ones on which the 
systems of Greek and Latin Poetry, as well as that 
of all other languages, can be rationally and sub- 
stantially founded. 

Should it be asked, as perhaps it may, how a 
principle, so plain and simple, could so long have 
remained concealed, or, after so long' concealment, 


have at length been discovered, it may be answered 
almost in the words of Demosthenes % that Na- 
ture is prompt to bestow on those present the ad- 
vantages belonging to the absent, and to reward 
those disposed to take the labour and pains, with 
that kind and degree of intelligence which cannot 
be acquired by such as are unwilling to seek. 

4 ym Ktv\yzvw, rd t£v c^sXyvruv.' — ' Naturam etiam ita ferre, ut 
1 preesentibus cedant quae sunt absentium, et volentibus labores 
* ac pericula adire quae sunt negligentium.' — Demosthenis Se- 
iectae Orationes, a MounJ;eney, 8vo. Lond. 1806, p. 9, 149. 


■Section Page 

I. Object and Extent of the present Work I 
II. Poetry first known and practised 

among the Jews 4 

III. There can be but three Sorts of Poetry 37 

IV. Heroic, the first Sort of Poetry .... 48 
V. Iambic, the second 56 

VI. Pceonic, the third 70 

VII. Every Kind of Poetry admits all equi- 
valent Feet 87 

VlII. No Licences admissible 92 

IX. Heroic Verse, what Feet that receives 114 
X. Iambic Metre, of what Feet that con- 
sists 127 

XI. Bacchiac or Pceonic, wltat Feet it ad- 
mits 135 

XII. Origin of Comedy and Tragedy , . . . 140 

XIII. Comedy not a musical Performance 

throughout 161 

XIV. Tibiae, their Nature 182 

XV. Particulars relating to the Publication 

of the first Editions of Plautus and 

Terence 189 


Section Page 

XVI. Division of the Verses in Terence, 
as it at present stands, but com- 
paratively of modern Date, and 
manifestly very corrupt in itself 202 
XVII. Not to be relied on, because the Ma- 
nuscripts and printed Editions 
vary from each other in the Divi- 
sion of the Verses 212 

XVIII. Variety of Verse neither necessamj 

nor proper in itself. 218 

XIX. Chorus and Verse employed in the 

Greek Tragedies, their Nature'. . 227 
XX. Species of Verse used by Greek Co- 

mie Writers , . 242 

XXI. Latin Comic Verse, Specimens of . . 281 
XXII. Priscian, his System 292 

XXIII. Authority of Manuscripts and an- 

cient Copies not to be received in 
Contradiction to Prosodia ...... 304 

XXIV. Transcribers of Manuscripts, who 

they were, and what their Quali- 
fications, Merits, and Defects . . 312 
XXV. Corrections in Manuscripts, how and 

by whom made . .... 351 

XXVI. Supposed Authority of Gramma- 
rians not to be admitted or received 399 
XXVII. Aristotle De Poetica not to be 

trusted, and ivhy 434 

XXVIII. Latin Comic Metre cannot be Iambic 442 


Scctioa Page 

XXIX. Latin Comic Metre really Saturnian 

or Bacchiac 451 

XXX. It admits all equivalent Feet, hut no 

Licences 467 

XXXI. Pindar and Horaces Odes to be new 

regulated , 469 

XXXII. Conclusion from the Whole ...... 476 


Page 17, line 21, for Jathed; varie read Jathed, varie 

24, — 2 from the bottom, for complectitnr } read coniplectitur ? 
40, — 6, for Rythmum, read Rhythnmm. 

171, — 23, for Ostia, read 0**«. 

172, — 25, for discrepant, read discrepuit. 

255, — last but two,") r rr , . , , rT , . . 

. ' . ■ , , >for Urbinato* read Urbmnts, 

256, — last bat one, j ' 






On the Object and Extent of the present Jf r ork. 

To settle, on definite, simple, and rational rules, 
the principles of both Greek and Latin Prosodia 
in general 3 , which have been greatly mistaken; 

To show, by decisive evidence, that poetical 
licences, by which the writings of the classic poets 
have been hitherto supposed to be disfigured, have 
no real existence, and that the passages in question 
are not deviations from rule, but consistent with 
the true principles of versification b ; 

To explain, on the foundation of the rules of 
Prosodia, the Jong-contested point, as to the nature 
of Latin comic metre c ; 

a Sect. 3, 7, 8, 9, 10, 1J. P. Sect. 8. 

c Sect. 20, 2%, 29. 


To regulate, by a proper division into their 
respective kinds of metre, the verses of Plautus 
and Terence d , and some of the Odes of Pindar 
and Horace e , which have been erroneously given ; 

And to ascertain the probable origin of Poetry 
in general f , and of dramatic Poetry in particular^ 
are the principal objects of the present work. 

Points, important as these to the very existence 
of Poetry, and affecting, as they do, the founda- 
tion itself of both the Greek and Latin systems, 
in all their branches, are evidently of the highest 
concern to every one who entertains a due sense 
of the value, and an adequate regard for the inter- 
ests of literature : but, though often undertaken, 
and by men of eminence, they have never been 
sufficiently investigated. The causes of the failure 
of those who thus engaged in the pursuit, have 
been a want of knowledge in themselves of the 
principles of music, too great a dependence on 
the authority of celebrated names, such as the old 
grammarians, Priscian and the rest ; an erroneous 
system of Prosodia, traditionally delivered in the 
course of their education ; an idea, the conse- 
quence of that system, much too confined and re- 
stricted, as to the kinds of feet admissible in the 
several sorts of verse ; and a total ignorance of 
the actual state of the text, as it stands in the 
earliest copies, both printed and manuscript. 

d Sect. 28. e Sect. SO. 

f Sect. 2. i Sect. 12. 


From sources, unexplored by former writers, 
but resorted to on the present occasion, with no 
common degree of care and assiduity, and with 
proportionate success, evidence of the strongest 
nature, but hitherto unknown, has been procured 
in the course of a search prosecuted and continued 
for a succession of years. It was originally com- 
menced for the purpose of impartially ascertaining 
the real facts, not to justify or support any system 
or idea previously entertained ; and its result was 
in the outset expected to have been a confirmation 
of the opinions generally received on the subject ; 
but it has proved, on the contrary, their total de- 

No captious opposition to the sentiments of 
any writer — -no wish to show what plausible argu- 
ments might be urged on points evidently not de- 
fensible — no endeavours to support, on sophistical 
and fallacious grounds, any opinion, because its 
author was too proud to confess he had formerly 
been mistaken, will here be found ; but, if an au- 
thor's sentiments are rejected, or controverted, it 
is because the weight of evidence is against them. 
The facts adduced are themselves incontrovertible : 
none but fair and natural conclusions are drawn 
from them, and there seems, therefore, no reason 
to imagine they will fail of producing their due 
effect on the mind of every candid, intelligent, 
and judicious reader. 

b a 



Poetry first known and practised among the Jeivs, 

The Greeks not the original discoverers of science and know- 
ledge—Heathen mythology borrowed from the Scriptures 
— Megasthenes, Aristobulus, and Numenius, their opinions 
to that effect. — Greeks obtained from Egypt astronomy and 
their mythology.— Greek philosophers travelled into Egypt. 
— Classical prejudices in favour of Greek literature almost 
inveterate. — Imitations by the Greeks not usually, if ever, 
disclosed, as they ought to be, in the course of classical 
education. — Instances of poems among the Jews prior to the 
time of the Greeks, — Hebrew Poetry, its nature. — Calmet 
has collected the several opinions on this subject. — Josephus, 
St. Jerom, Philo Judaeus, Theodore Hubert, Francis Gomarus, 
Le Clerc, Scaliger, Augustin of Eugubio, Louis Cappel, Gro- 
tius, &c. their several opinions, as stated by Calmet. — Re- 
marks on Hubert and Gomarus's opinions. — Possible in all 
languages to ascertain quantities of syllables, and therefore the 
poetry in each may be compared with the Latin and Greek.— 
Sir Philip Sidney's attempt to regulate English poetry by La- 
tin feet. — Hebrew poetry certainly capable of comparison 
with Latin and Greek. — The Hebrew language the more an- 
cient; Greek and Latin rules for quantities, therefore, a more 
modern invention.— Le Clercs opinion refuted. — Manwaring 
gives the first Psalm in Hebrew, scanned, and with the quan- 
tities marked. — Scaliger's opinion refuted. — The Cartha- 
ginian scene in Plautus's Pcenulus completely Hebrew, and 
in verse. — Scaliger contradicts himself. — His opinion that 
some parts of the Bible are in verse. — His sentiments exa- 
mined.— Aristotle's opinion that a poem containing all sorts 

the Nature op poetry. 5 

of verse is not a poem.— Augustin of Eugubio's opinion 
examined. — Josephus, his sentiments stated— St. Jerom, his 
idea— Scaliger, his opinion that some parts of the Bible are 
verse, noticed. — Scaliger's and St. Jerom's opinions com- 
pared. — Manwaring's opinion as to the nature of Hebrew 
poetry. — The first Psalm, as given by him in the Hebrew 
language, with the quantities marked, objectionable as to 
distribution, because the verses of unequal length, — Quan- 
tities of the feet used in it.— -The Psalm itself, as scanned and 
marked by him. — A new regulation and division proposedj, 
to make it of more equal length. — Poetical licences do not 
seem to have been used. — Bishop Lowth, his opinion on 
Hebrew poetry. — Remarks on it.— -Models of all the various 
sorts of Greek poetry to be found much earlier among the 
Jews. — Greek poetry and its rules certainly derived from 
the poems in the Scriptures. — Hexameter verse the earliest 
among the Jews, as well as among the Greeks. — Poetry 
among the Jews may be reasonably supposed to have pro- 
ceeded from inspiration. 

Notwithstanding the perpetual vanity and injus- 
tice of the Greeks, in assuming to themselves the 
invention and discovery of all arts, sciences, and 
branches of knowledge, and their arrogant cen- 
sure on all other nations for barbarism and infe- 
riority of understanding, it is an unquestionable 
fact, as will soon be shown from the strongest evi- 
dence, that all that boasted intelligence and know- 
ledge which they affected to disclose as the result 
of their own sagacity, was already known in the 
world, long before the Greeks existed as a nation; 
that those nations, whom, in their superlative wis- 
dom, they have chosen to term and consider as 
barbarians, were so far their superiors in intellect, 

b 3 


intelligence, and information, as to be able to be- 
come, as they actually did, their instructors ; 
and that, in point of fact, it was from those very 
nations, and not from their own discoveries, that 
the Greeks themselves obtained what they knew 
on the subject. 

Even their own system of mythology, their 
only code of religion, contemptible as it was, as 
being destitute of the foundation of Morality, they 
were unable to frame without the assistance of the 
Holy Scriptures. At the very time when they 
sought to advance their own reputation for wis- 
dom and sagacity, by the production of something 
which should astonish all mankind by its excel- 
lence, their superior intellects and sagacity were 
able to suggest no better a plan, than one teeming 
with the grossest absurdities ; and, even for the 
formation of this contemptible fabric, they found 
themselves reduced to the wretched necessity of 
borrowing from those truths which it was their 
decided intention to treat as falsehoods, and which 
they corruptly and dishonestly meant to distort 
and sophisticate, in order to promote their own 
sinister purposes. 

To avoid detection, they have, it is true, dis- 
guised their fables, by changing the names of per- 
sons and countries, uniting in the history of one 
person the actions of several, and fixing for the 
residence and existence of their heroes and deities, 
countries and periods of time different from those 
in which their originals really flourished. But 


the foundations of all their principal fables are 
manifestly to be traced in the histories of the Old 
Testament h ; and it is believed, that, perhaps with- 
out a single exception, scarcely any one Deity oc- 
curs in their system, for whom a parallel instance 
may not be discovered in the Sacred Writings, 
which existed long before their time, and with 
which it is proved, beyond the possibility of doubt, 
they were thoroughly acquainted. 

Megasthenes \ a Greek historian cited by Eu- 
sebius k , says, that all which the ancient Greeks 
have delivered on the subject of Nature, had been 
written by the Jews long before; and Aristobulus, 
a Jewish philosopher, and Numenius, a Greek \ a 
celebrated Pythagorean and Platonic, both affirm, 
that Pythagoras and Plato have only rendered into 
Greek what they had already found in the writings 
of Moses. The former expressly adds, that the 
books of Moses had been translated into Greek, 

h See Vossius De Idololatria, Bochart Phaleg, Natalis 
Comes, Lilius Giraldus, Gale's Court of the Gentiles, &c. &c. 

> Who wrote under Seleucus Nicanor, king of Syria, about 
the 122d Olympiad, 294 years before Christ. Lavaur, Confe- 
rence de la Fable, Preliminary Discourse, p. 47. — See also Hel- 
vici Chronologia, edit. Oxon. 1662, p. 73, on the authority of 
Eusebius, — 300 years before our Saviour. Saxii Onomast. Lit. 
Traject. ad Rhenium, edit. 1775, vol. i. p. 92. 

k Eusebius, 1. ix. c. 3; Clemens Alexandrinus, Stromata, 
1. i. as cited by Lavaur. 

1 Of whose works only a few fragments remain, preserved 
by Origen, Theodoret, Clemens Alexandrinus, and Eusebius. 
Lavaur, ubi supra. 

B 4 


not only before the time of Alexander, but even 
prior to that of the Persian monarchy m ; and Nu- 
menius's assertion is well known, that Plato is no 
other than Moses speaking Greek n . 

That the Greeks had received from the Egyp- 
tians the knowledge of astrology and divination, 
the names of their gods, and the system for their 
worship, together with their code of laws, the 
historians themselves teach us °. Herodotus even 
mentions some of the laws of Solon, which had 
been borrowed and taken from the Egyptians p : 
and Solon himself was reproached by the learned 

m < Mosaica volumina, ante Alexandrum et ante Persarum 

* imperium, traducta fuerant.' Aristobulus, as cited by La- 
vaur. See also Croesii 'O^pos ECpawj, sive Historia Hebraeorum 
ab Homero, Hebraicis nominibus ac sententiis conscripta in 
Odyssea et Iliade, 12mo. Dordraci, 170i, vol. i. Introduction, 
p. 131. The words are these: * Praeterea, admonet nos Clemens 

* Alexandrinus, Strom, lib. i. ante Demetrium, priusquam rerum 

* potirentur Alexander et Persse, versa fuisse quae ab Hebraeis 
c gesta fuerant in exitu ex iEgypto, et quaecunque eis insignia et 

* facta erant, et apparuerant, et regionis per vim quaesitam pos- 
' sessionem, et omnes quae latae sunt leges.' 

n ' Quid est aliud Plato, quam Moses atticissans?' Hesychius, 
art. Numenius, as cited by Lavaur. 

Herodotus, throughout the whole of his second book, and 
Diodorus Siculus, in his first book, p. 62, as cited by Lavaur, 
Prel. Disc. p. 53. ' Est divinandi in templis ratio, ab iEgypto 
4 adscita, iEgyptii, igitur, extiterunt principes conventus et 

* pompas, et conciliabula faciendi, et ab iis Graeci didicerunt.' 
Herodot. lib. ii. p. 49. See Lavaur, ubi supra, p. 53. Hero- 
dotus says, that the names of the twelve deities, the Greeks 
acquired from the Egyptians. See Natalis Comes, Mythologia^ 
lib. i. c. 7. 

p Lavaur, Prel. Disc. p. 53. 


Egyptians with the ignorance of the Greeks, who, 
they said, were only mere children in the ancient 
branches of knowledge <*. 

Diodorus Siculus r has given the names of the 
first sages and celebrated learned men among the 
Greeks, who went into Egypt to acquire there, 
during a residence of great part of their lives, an 
acquaintance with those laws and branches of 
knowledge, without which they found they knew 
nothing. The Egyptian priests, says this histo- 
rian, show, from their registers, and prove, by 
substantial evidence, that Orpheus, Museeus, Me- 
lampe, Deedalus, Homer, Lycurgus of Sparta, So- 
lon the Athenian, Plato the mathematician, Eu- 
doxus, Democritus of Abdera, and CEnopis of 
Chios, came among them. Now Solon flourish- 
ed before the 50th Olympiad s ; Pythagoras, in 
the 60th *; and Plato, born in the 88th Olym- 

i * O Solo, Solo, pueri semper estis ; nee quisquam ex 

* Grsecia senex : nulla apud vos, e vetustatis commemoratione, 

* prisca opinio, nulla cana scientia.' Plato, in Timseo, p. 475, 
col. i. as cited by Lavaur, Prel. Disc. p. 56. 

T Bibliotheca, lib. i. p. 60, as cited by Lavaur, Prel. Disc, 
p. 56. 

s Lavaur^ Prel. Disc. p. 57. Helvicus places him in the 
47th, viz. 589 years before Christ. Chronologia, p. 61. Saxius, 
in his Onomast. Lit. edit. 1775, vol. i. p. 20, introduces him in 
the 47th, 592 years before Christ, and says, he died in the 
54th Olymp. Ibid. 

4 Lavaur, Pre!. Disc. p. 58. Pythagoras flourished from 
the 50th to the 70th Olympiad. Eusebius, as cited by Hel- 
vicus, p. 61. Pythagoras flourished in the 67th Olymp. 507 
years before Christ. Saxius, On. Lit. edit. 1775, vol. i. p. 27, 



piad u , flourished about the 90th \ The Greeks were, 
therefore, well acquainted with Jewish knowledge, 
long before the time of Alexander, who did not be- 
gin to reign till the 111th Olympiad y i and, lastly, 
Aristotle himself confesses, as Clearchus his dis- 
ciple reports, that, when he was in Asia, a Jewish 
philosopher, who came to visit him, communicated 
to him much more information than this Jew re- 
ceived from him in return z . 

On a fair and accurate examination and com- 
parison, the heathen mythology will be found all 
borrowed and corrupted from the Scriptures ; 
and, besides a multitude of ancient historians 
who assert the fact a , the Scriptures themselves 
confirm it : for the Jews, when persecuted by An- 

He was bora in the 49th Olymp. and died in the 70th. Ibid, 
p. 28. 

u Lavaur, Prelim. Disc. p. 58. Plato died in the 108th 
Olympiad, aged 80. Diogenes Laertius, as cited by Helvicus? 
p. 71. Plato was born in the 87th Olymp. and died in the 103th* 
Saxii Onom. Lit. vol. i. p. 61. 

x Lavaur, Prel. Disc. p. 58. 

y Lavaur, Prel. Disc. p. 58. See also Helvici Chronologia, 
p. 70; and Saxii Onom. Lit. vol. i. p. 79. 

z Lavaur, Prel. Disc. p. 58. ' Cum in maritimis Asia? locis 
* versaremur, Judaeus philosophus amore ad nos sponte venit, 
' qui multo plura nobis attulit, quam accept.' Eusebius, in 
Preparat. Evang. lib. ix. cap. 3, as cited by Lavaur, in a note, 
Prel. Disc. p. 58. 

a Justin Martyr, Clemens Alexandrinus, Origen, Minutius 
Felix, St. Cyril, Arnobius, Lactantius, St. Austin, in his book 
De Civitate Dei, Theodoret, Joseph us, Philo Judaeus, St. 
Athanasius : all cited by Lavaur, Prel. Disc. p. 59. 


tiochus, king of Syria, 166 years before the time 
of our Saviour, opened, in the presence of God, 
to revive their confidence, the books of the law, 
which, says the Sacred History, had been ransacked 
by the heathen nations, and on which they had 
framed the idea and false resemblance of their 
idols and worship b . Although it is true that the 
books of the Maccabees, in the first of which this 
fact is related, are, by our church, placed among 
the apocryphal, as not having such strong marks 
of inspiration as those considered as authentic, 
yet there is no reason, from that circumstance, to_ 
reject their evidence as history, especially when 
they give, as they do in this case, the authority of 
the original author, by stating, that the two books 
of the Maccabees are an abridgment, in one vo- 
lume, of the five books written by Jason of Cyrene c . 
Among classical scholars, prejudices in favour 
of Greek literature, talent, and originality of in- 
vention, are so peculiarly strong, as to be almost 
indeed inveterate; and, for want of a due ac- 
quaintance with the degree of intellect and in- 
formation possessed by contemporary nations, the 
real fact of the imitations practised by the Greeks 
is not, as it ought to be, usually, if ever, disclosed 
to their pupils, by those who have the care of 
juvenile education. The facts already produced, 
and those which are to folio w, will, it is hoped, 
produce an alteration in that respect in the system 

b 1 Maccabees, iii. 48. c 2 Maccabees, ii. 23* 


of classical education. Nor is evidence wanting 
to show tha^ in the art of Poetry for instance, thd 
object of present attention, the principles of metre 
and versification were in like manner most evi- 
dently derived from the Hebrews. 

The poems among the Hebrews, upon which 
it is intended more particularly to rely, as actual 
instances of metre and versification, are, 

The Song of Moses, after the passage through 
the Red Sea, 1491 years before our Saviour d ; 

That other, a little before he died, to recom- 
mend the observance of the law, 1451 before 
Christ e ; 

The Song of Deborah, 1296 before Christ f ; 

That of Hannah, Samuel's mother, 1171 be- 
fore Christ"; 

The Psalms of David and his continuators, at 
various periods between 1062 and 1004 before 
Christ 11 ; 

d Exodus, xv. I. Helvicus places the departure from 
Egypt in the year of the world 2453, which would be 1496 be-v 
fore Christ. See Helvici Chronologia, p. 25. 

e Deuteronomy, xxxii. 1, &c. Helvicus states the death of 
Moses in the year of the world 5258, 1456 before Christ, Chro- 
nologia, p. 24. 

f Judges, v. 1, &c. Helvicus refers the defeat of Sisera to 
the year of the world 3419, 1292 before Christ, Chronologia 5 
p. 23. 

s 1 Samuel, ii. 1 — 10. Helvicus dates the birth of Samuel 
about the year of the world 3579, 1133 before Christ, Chrono- 
logia, p. 38. 

h See the dates to several in the Book of Psalms. David 
reigned from the year of the world 3653, 1059 before Christ, 


And, lastly, the Book of Job, written by 
Moses about 1521 years before Christ 1 . 

The Songs of Moses, of Deborah, and of 
Hannah, and the Psalms, are acknowledged as 
poetry by the Abbe Fleury, in his tract on the 
Manners of the Israelites, part ii. chap. 11 ; the 
second Song of Moses, by Scaliger and Josephus k ; 
the Psalms, by Josephus 1 and St. Jerom 1 "; and 
the Book of Job, by Scaliger n and St. Jerom°. 

Of what kind the Hebrew poetry really was, 
has, it is true, been made a question; for the 
solution of which, on the present occasion, in- 
quiries have been unsuccessfully made of persons, 
who, from their situations and other circum- 
stances, were thought likely to be able to furnish 

and died A. M. 3693, 1019 before Christ. Helvici Chron. p. 42. 
David died 1015 years before the birth of our Saviour. See 
the marginal notes in the 4to. edit, of the Bible, 1 Kings, i. 10. 

1 See the marginal date in the Bible, at the head of the 
Book of Job. 

k Scaliger, in his Annotations on Eusebius, as stated by 
Gale, in his Court of the Gentiles, part i. book iii. p. 2 and 3. 
Josephus, Antiquities of the Jews, book iv. chap. 8. 

1 Antiquities of the Jews, book vii. chap. 10. 

m See, among the Prolegomena to the Latin Vulgate Bible, 
St. Jerom's Preface, entitled, ' Hieronymi Prologus Galeatus,* 
and that denominated, * Hieronymi Paulino.' 

n See his Annotations on Eusebius, as stated by Gale, be- 
fore referred to. 

° See his Preface, entitled, * Hieronymi Paulino,' and that 
entitled ' S. Hieronymi in Librum Job. Prsefatio,' among the 
Prolegomena to the Latin Vulgate Bible* 


intelligence ; but the subject seems so far to have 
sunk into oblivion, that no assistance could be 
procured, JJesorting, however, to the testimony 
of competent writers of the early times, such for 
instance as Josephus, himself a Jew, Eusebius, 
St. Jerom, and others, and connecting their 
opinions with the natures of Poetry and Music 
themselves, it is conceived a conclusion not far 
distant from the truth may be safely and ratio- 
nally found. 

Calmet seems, in his Dictionnaire de la Bible, 
to have collected together the several varieties of 
opinion on this matter ; and the substance of his 
account is given, to the following effect, in the 
Dictionnaire Historique of Moreri, fo. Amst. 1740, 
art. Poesie des Hebreux *. 

c From the manner in which Josephus, Origen, 

* Eusebius, and St. Jerom speak of the Poetry of 
i the Hebrews, it should seem that, in their time, 
€ all the beauty and rules of it were still under- 
' stood. Josephus says, in several places, that 

* the Canticles composed by Moses, are in heroic 

* verse ; and that David composed different sorts 
' of verse, of which, some were trimeters, and 
' others pentameters. Origen and Eusebius have 
c followed the same opinion. St. Jerom says, the 
€ Psalter is composed of Alcaic verses, Iambics and 
'* Sapphics, like those of Pindar and Horace ; and 
c that the Canticles of Deuteronomy and of Isaiah, 
€ the books of Job and of Solomon, are in hex- 


e ameter and pentameter verses, &c. Philo » says, 
' that the Essenians have some ancient poems, the 
' verses of which are of a variety of forms, and of 
c several measures : some are of three members ; 

* others are hymns, sung during sacrifices ; some 
< are recited at repasts, and others are accompa- 
6 nied with dancing. Theodore Hubert has thought 
' he discovered in the Bible verses similar to the 
f Greek and Latin ; and some of these he has 

* pointed out. Francis Gomarus, in his tract, en- 
' titled, " Davidis Lyra," has pretended to give 
f rules of the Hebrew Poetry, exactly similar to 
f those of the Greek and Latin ; but he has drawn 
f on himself a refutation from Louis Cappel, which 
' has not been answered. Le Clerc has written a 
c dissertation, to show that the Poetry of the He- 
f brews was in rhymes, very nearly like those of the 
6 French <* ; and his opinion has found a consider- 
f able number of partisans. Some maintain, that, 
' in the ancient Hebrew verse, there was neither 
( measure nor feet. Scaliger even asserts, that 
1 their language, like those of the Syrians, Arabs, 
c and Abyssinians, is not susceptible of this re- 
c straint. Augustin of Eugubio says, that the 

p Philo Judasus lived 40 years after our Saviour. Saxius, 
first edit. p. 14. 

s It may be reasonably doubted, whether, in this assertion, 
Le Clerc has not mistaken rhythmus for rhyme, from which it is 
very different ; or, if he has not done so, whether the author 
of the article in Moreri has not misconceived him, and been 
guilty of a similar error* 


* Hebrews have neither heroic verses, nor Iambic 
' verses, nor of any other measure, but only some- 

* thing which approaches to them, like the songs 
f of the barbarians. This opinion is maintained 
' by Louis Cappel, Martin Martinius, Samuel Boh- 

lius, Vasmuth, Augustus Pfeiffer, and by some 

* others. Grotius declares himself for this opinion; 
' and Calmet thinks it the most tenable. See his 
c Dissertation on the Poetry of the Hebrews, at 

* the head of his Commentary on Exodus.' 

The sentiments of Theodore Hubert and Fran- 
cis Gomarus are, perhaps, entitled to more respect 
than the author of the above article seems willing 
to allow ; for, although the rules for ascertaining 
the quantities of the syllables might not, perhaps, 
from the different genius of the two languages, 
have been the same in the Hebrew, as they were 
in the Latin or Greek ; yet, if the Hebrew verses 
were, as to feet and quantities, constructed like 
the Latin or Greek, that is surely adequate cause 
for considering them as so far the same. Jt is and 
must be possible, in all languages, to ascertain, 
from practice, in some determinate manner, what 
syllables are long, and what short ; and an ar- 
rangement of those syllables, conformable to the 
feet of the Latin and Greek verses, might, there- 
fore, easily be produced r . Similar attempts, upon 

r The difference of quantity in the Hebrew syllables has 
been ascertained, as will appear from the following passages : 
Cardinal Bellarmine, in his Institutiones Linguae Hebraicse, 


this very principle of the natural quantities of fch« 
syllables, have been made in the case of our own 
language., by Sir Philip Sidney^ in his Arcadia % 

12mo. 1619, p. 245, speaking De Poetica, uses these words: « Ve- 

* tus quidem Poeticae Mosis et Prophetarum hoc tempore penitus 

* ignoratur. Veruntamen, recentiorum Hebraeorum Cantica 

* rhythmicis raaxime versibus constant, quales ferme a plerisque 

* proximis hisce saeculis condebantur, quos Leoninos appellant. 

* Quoniam tamen ipsi quoque recentiorum Hebraici versus certo 

* aliquo, turn pedum, turn syllabarum, numero continentur, pri- 
' mum de syllabis, ac pedibus, deinde etiam de vario carminum 
' rhythmorumque genere disseretur.' The same author, p. 246, 
speaking of the Hebrew syllables, says, some are long and 
some short ; that the long are such as consist of one of the ten 
vowel points ; arid that the short are such as have any one of 
the three semi-points, or a point, which he mentions. P. 247, 
speaking of feet, he thus expresses himself: ' Pedes, quibus in 

* versibus utuntur Hebraei, duo sunt; alter dicitur Tenungha, 

* motio, et constat syllaba longa. Alter dicitur Jathed, clavus-, 

* qui duabus constat syllabis, longa et brevi, instar Iambi. 

* Porro, ex his duobus pedibus Thenungha et Jathed ; varie 

* permixtis, fiunt alii quatuor qui nobis appellantur Spondaeus - -, 

* Bacchius - - ^, Creticus - " -, Molossus * Per hos quatuor 

' pedes et Iambum, quippe voce usuque notiores, Hebrasorum 
' carmina metiemur. > From these passages it is evident that 
the quantities of the syllables have been determined by the He- 
brew points, and that, when they have been thus ascertained, 
they have been employed to form such feet as occur in the 
Latin and Greek Poetry. Since the quantities have been thus 
settled, it seems almost unaccountable why the ancient system 
of versification should not be capable of discovery, if properly 

s See a specimen of twenty lines of this kind, in Sidney's 
Arcadia, edit, fo* Lond. 1638, p. 77, beginning, 

Fortune, Nature, Love, long have contended about me, 
Which should most miseries cast on a wretch that I am: 

Fortune thus 'gan say, Misery and Misfortune is all one, 
,Aud of Misfortune^ Fortune hath only the gift, See. 



and by other authors ; and, although from them 
it is evident, that, in consequence of the different 
formation of the words, the same rules for quan- 
tity, which prevailed in the Latin or Greek, can- 
not be applicable to the English, it is impossible 
to deny that the verses of those authors have a 
degree of cadence and harmony, which entitles 
them to rank as measured Poetry ; nay, the very 
structure of our heroic verse, which is generally 
supposed Iambic, of five feet, or ten syllables* 
manifestly rests upon this very principle; and none 
of those, who consider it as .of that sort, ever 
conceived or thought of contending, that, at the 
time they thus admitted the feet were similar to 
the Latin and Greek, the quantities of the syl- 
lables were in any respect guided by the rules of 
Prosodia in either of those languages. Not to 
mention, besides, that, as the Hebrew was a far 
more ancient language than either Latin or Greek, 
the rules for the quantities of syllables, in either 
of these latter languages, must be comparatively 
of much more recent invention than those of the 

LeClerc's supposition that the Hebrew verse was 
in rhyme, stands contradicted by fact, at least so 
far as regards the ancient species of Poetry. Man- 
waring t has given the first Psalm in the Hebrew 
language, but the Italic character, so that persons 
unacquainted with the original language, and the 
character in which it is written, can judge; 

1 Manwaring's Stichology, p. 76. 

•;the nature of poetry. 19 

and the words cannot in any way be made to 

Scaliger's conjecture, that, in the Hebrew 
verse, there was neither measure nor feet, and 
that the language is incapable of such a restraint, 
is evidently absurd u . In every language, as has 
been already noticed, there must be a difference 
of quantity in the syllables, though by what rules 
that quantity is determined, must of course be 
different, according to the genius of each. Every 
language must be, and is, therefore, capable of 
some arrangement of long and short quantities or 
syllables, and consequently of formation into 
verse. Without measure and feet, every compe- 
tent judge must be satisfied there can be no such 
thing as verse ; and, without verse, there cannot 
be Poetry. Poetical language in prose is so called, 
as containing expressions more figurative, lan- 
guage and sentiments more elevated, and periods 
more musical than those which occur in the usual 
and ordinary style of writing, and as resembling 
those which are used in regular poems. It is 
most evident, therefore, that poetical prose cannot 
be Poetry itself, but only a resemblance of it so 
far ; and that it has its denomination from its re- 
semblance only, not as being the thing itself, from 
which, indeed, it is clearly distinguished by the 
very appellation, 

But, not to rest solely on reasoning and argu- 

* See it stated before. 

C 2 


ment, the question may be settled on decisive 
facts. The only specimen of the Carthaginian 
language, now known to be existing, is contained 
in a scene, Act v. Sc. 1, in Plautus's comedy of 
Poenulus ; and this specimen is at the same time 
go completely Hebrew, that it has been found, on 
experiment, that any Hebrew scholar can under- 
stand it x , a circumstance not wonderful to those 
who recollect that the Greeks themselves, and 
many other countries, borrowed their language 
and knowledge originally from the Phenicians, 
who were, in fact, no other than the inhabitants 
of the land of Canaan ?-. That it is in verse, is 
also clear; so it is printed in the several editions; 
and, from the cadence of the first line, it seems 
to be exactly the Latin and Greek hexameter he- 
roic, with the quantities of the syllables regulated, 
not by the rules for versification in those lan- 
guages, but by the nature and genius of its own. 
If Calmet has not misunderstood Scaliger's 
sentiments, and this last person has any where de- 
livered, as, from Calmet's account, he seems to have 
done, any such opinion as that above mentioned, 
he has most completely contradicted himself on an- 
other occasion. Theophilus Gale, in his Court of 

* It is said by Selden, De Diis Syris, edit. 12mo. Lugd.- 
Bat. 1629, p. 17, to be perfectly Hebrew, 

y See Selden, Be Diis Syris, p. 16. In this place the fol- 
lowing passage from Priscian is also given: ' Maxim e cum lin- 
< gua Poenorura, quae Chaldaese vel Ebrsece similis est et Syrse> 

i non habeat neutrum genus/ 


the Gentiles, part i. book iii. p. 2 and 3, gives, from 
Scaliger's Animadversions on Eusebius, fol. 6, 7, 
edit. 1658, the following, as Scaliger's sentiments 
on the subject of Hebrew Poetry : c We have/ 
says he, c the original form and mode of Scripture 
6 Poesie laid open to us by Joseph Scaliger, Ani- 
f madversiones in Euseb. Chron. fol. 6, 7, edit. 
< 1658. « We find not," saith he, " in the Psalter 
" or Lamentations, any Cantic bound up by laws 
" of metre ; but the discourse is merely prose., 
" animated by a poetic character. Only the Cantie 
■ 6 of Moses, in the last chap, of Deuteronomie, 
" the Proverbs of Solomon, and almost all the 
" book of Job, are bound up under the necessities 
f ( of rhyme, which rhyme is like two dimetrian 
if Iambics, with a tinnulus to the ear. The Cantic 
f< of Moses is a rhyme, drawing near unto a tetra- 
" meter Iambic, not unto an hexameter heroic, as 
" Josephus will have it : yea, there is no hexameter 
" or pentameter to be found in the sacred Bibles ; 
" neither does the rhyme in them consist of any 
u exact modes ; but the rhyme is sometimes 
u shorter, sometimes longer, according to the ca- 
" pacitie of the sentences," See. Thus much for 
' the judgment of Jos. Seal, touching Scripture 
■? Poesie, its several modes,' &c, 

Prose, animated by a poetic character, can 
never, in the judgment of men of sense, pass for 
Poetry; and, indeed, he distinctly admits after- 
wards a difference between them, by stating, as 
lie does, that the Cantic of Moses 5 the Proverbs 

? 3 


of Solomon, and almost all the book of Job, are 
in verses framed like two dimeter Iambics, with a 
tinnulus, as he says, to the ear. 

From the loose and indefinite manner in which 
Scaliger is here represented as having given his 
opinion, it is plain, to all acquainted with its prin- 
ciples, that he could not have known any thing of 
those of Music, from which the rules of Poetry un- 
questionably sprung ; and, without the assistance of 
which, they cannot be understood z . Poetry, with- 
out measure or rule, is absurd ; and the rules of Poe- 
try must have regulated how the sentences were to 
be formed, not the length of the verses have deter- 
mined whether they were verse, which could only 
be decided by the order of succession, in which the 
long and short syllables were placed : and, even 
if variety of verse in length was actually employed 
in the same composition, still all the verses must 
have been confined to metres of the same propor- 
tion ; for Aristotle, De Poetice, chap. i. has ex- 
pressly declared, that an author, who should in- 
troduce into the same poem different kinds of 
metre, would not merit the appellation of a Poet a . 

* See Sect. 3. 

a ' OuSe'v Ss koivov Ifiv 0/*«'f« kui Ey.'m^oy.Xitf 7rXr)v to jxsrpov* Si* 

* o ,7ov usv irownv Sr/.oiiov xaXvv' Toy de tyvcrioXoyov /xaAXov t) TToiriTriv. 
' Ipoivg $£ xxv eft t*j ewrayra to, (jlstqoc [juyvvuv 9 iroiono vw yJ^y\<nv 9 

* /ta.Qa7rsp Xajpwuwy Irtcincrtv iTTTrojiEVTaupoy, juujctw fafyuoi'aif e| ocTto^vrwv 
**tSv jiAETpwv, &k v$n x&\ Totnr^y •ffptjerayofeiiTsov:' — ( Nillil vero 

* Hpmero cum Empedocle commune est praeter metrum. 

* Quapropter hunc quidem Poetam appellare aequum est, 


Augustin of Eugubio's opinion,, that the He- 
brews have neither heroic nor Iambic verses, nor 
of any other measure, but only something which 
approaches to them, though adopted by those 5 
who, from that circumstance, clearly did not un- 
derstand the subject, is not entitled to any re- 
spect; because, for the reason already given, it 
is plain that every language must necessarily be 
capable of some kind of versification ; and the 
contrary idea is evidently repugnant to common 

Josephus, the Jewish historian, who lived so 
early as about 70 years after our Saviour b ; a man 
of eminent learning, and himself a Jew, could not 
fail of being necessarily well acquainted, as in- 
deed from his writings he appears to have been, 
not only with the principles of Latin and Greek, 
but of Hebrew Poetry also. In his Antiquities of 
the Jews, book iv, chap. 8, he notices the injunc- 
tions delivered by Moses against transgressing the 
law, which he places 1471 years before Christ, 
and expressly asserts that these, as they are still 
to be found recorded in the Bible, are in hexameter 

* ilium vero Physiologum potius quam Poetam. Porro si 
' quis, omnibus metris conjunctis imitationem instituat (sicut 
' Chaeremon composujt Centaurum, rhapsodiam ex omnibus 

* metris conflatam), non jam Poeta salutandus videtur.' — Aris- 
totle De Poetica, 8vo. Oxon. 1760, p. 2 & 53, 

b Saxii Onomasticon Literarium, p. 15. But in the subse« 
quent edit, of 1775, vol. i. p. 270, he places him 93 years after 
©ur Saviour. 

€ 4 


verse. The Psalms of David, which he dates as 
written 1040 years before Christ, he elsewhere 
expressly terms Odes and Hymns in various kinds 
of verse, and says, they are partly in trimeter, 
and partly in pentameter verse c . 

St. Jerom, who lived 350 years after our Sa- 
viour d , speaks of the 36th, 110th, 111th, 118th, 
and 144th Psalms, as differing from each other in 
metre e . Of the book of Job, he says, that it be- 
gins in prose, proceeds in verse, and finishes c pe- 
6 destri sermone f ;' by which last he must evidently 
mean measured prose ; and, in his Preface, en- 
titled, c S. Hieronymi in Librum Job Praefatio/ 
he states the different parts more particularly 
thus : 6 A principio itaque vomminis, usque ad 
6 verba Job, apud Hebrseos prosa oratio est. Porro 
€ a verbis Job, in quibus ait, " Pereat dies, in 
u qua natus sum, et nox in qua dictum est con- 
i( ceptus est homo," usque ad enm locum, ubi 
6 ante finem voluminis scriptum est, " Idcirco ipse 
*- me reprehendo, et ago poenitentiam in fa villa 
" et cinere," hexametri versus sunt, dactylo spon- 
? dseoque currentes, et, propter linguae idioma, 

* Antiquities of the Jews, book vii. chap. 10. 

d Saxii Onomasticon, p. 23. But in the subsequent edit. 
of 1775, vol. i, p. 425, he says he flourished about 367. 

e See, among the Prolegomena to the Latin Vulgate Bible, 
St. Jerom's Preface, entitled, * Hieronymi Prologus Galeatus.' 

f In his Preface, entitled, ' Hieronymus Paulino,' among 
the same Prolegomena, he says, * Joba exemplar patienti^e* 
* quae non mysteria suo sermone complectitur, prosa incipit s 
4 versu labitur ? pedestri sermone finitur, s . 


* crebro recipientes et alios pedes, non earundem 
6 syllabarum, sed eorundem temporum. Interdum 

* quoque rhythmus, ipse duleis et tinnulus, fertur 
< numeris pedum solutis, quod metrici magis quam 
c simplex lector intelligunt. A supradieto autem 
■ versu ad finem libri, parvum comma quod re- 
f manet prosa oratione contexitur.' By this rhyth~ 
mus, which., as he says,, proceeds c numeris pe- 
( dum solutis/ he can mean nothing but measured 
prose ; a method less strict than verse, but more 
polished, smooth, and flowing, than the ordinary 
style of prose. From St. Jerom's discrimination, 
it should, however, appear, that all the speeches 
of Job and his friends are in verse; but the intro- 
ductory and concluding parts, containing the nar- 
rative, in prose. 

The above passage is in the original immedi- 
ately succeeded by the following : 6 Quod si cui 
f videtur uicredulum, metra scilicet esse apud He- 

* braeos, et in morem nostri Flacci, Graecique 
f Pindari, et Alcaei, et Sapphus, vel Psalterium, 
f vel Lamentationes, vel omnia ferme Scripturarum 
6 cantica comprehendi, legat Philonem, Josephum, 
6 Origenem s, Caesariensem Eusebium h ; et eorum 

* testimonio me verum dicere comprobabit.' 

In another place of the Preface, entitled^ 

* Origen lived 230 years after our Saviour. Saxius, first 
edit. p. 21. 

* Eusebius Nourished 315 years after Christ. Ibid. p.. %L 


c Hieronymus Paulino/ speaking- of David, he says, 
6 David, Simonides noster, Pindarus, et Alcseus, 
c Flaccus quoque, Catullus atque Serenus, Chris- 
* turn lyra personat, et in decachordo psalterio ab 
6 inferis excitat resurgentem.' 

Scaliger, it has been already noticed, denies 
that the Psalter, or Lamentations, is verse; but 
admits that the Cantic of Moses, in the last chap- 
ter of Deuteronomy, the Proverbs of Solomon, 
and almost all the book of Job, are in metre; 
which metre, as he says, is like two dimeter Iam- 
bics, with a tinnulus to the ear ; and adds, that 
the Cantic of Moses is in metre resembling Tetra- 
meter Iambic. 

The ground of difference between the opinions 
of Josephus and St. Jerom on the one hand, and 
Scaliger on the other, which induced the two 
former to consider that as hexameter verse, which 
the latter thought Iambic Tetrameter, seems to 
have been this, as explained by St. Jerom himself, 
that they rightly admitted as allowable, into hexa- 
meter verse, all the different kinds of equivalent 
feet ; while Scaliger, in conformity to the modern 
practice, restricted the feet to the Spondee and 
Dactyl alone. Under the former idea, the Spondee, 
Dactyl, Anapaest, Amphibrachys, and Proceleusma 
might separately be received, in exchange for each 
other; and the correctness of this opinion, in 
preference to that of later date, will be hereafter 
distinctly and decidedly shown, in a subsequent 


section., by instances from Homer, Virgil, and Ho- 
race K 

Edward Manwaring, who appears to have been 
a schoolmaster, as he speaks, p. 72, of his book, 
of having taught school twenty years, has, in 
his ' Stichology, or a Recovery of the Latin, 
< Greek, and Hebrew Numbers,' 4to. Lond. 1737, 
in a Latin letter written by himself and there in- 
troduced, on the subject of the latter, expressed 
himself, p. 76, in the following words : ' Esse 
c apud Hebreeos numeros et metra, genus orationis 
f sublime, et concisum, atque omnibus figurarum 
c luminibus illustre, abunde testatur, atque ut ait 
f Episcopus k , " Si veteris Testamenti libri nu- 
" meris scripti sunt, quid impedit, quo minus 
6: Poesis hsec feliciter investigetur ? Si syllabarum 
" numerum, quibus singulas voces constent, rite 
66 teneamus, quidni vero teneamus ? si quidem 
" veram Hebraica legend! rationem magistri tra- 
" diderint, si puncta codici Hebrseo recte appo- 
iC suerint." 

c Esto magistri puncta codici Hebraeo recte 
' apposuerint, a prsesenti igitur positione et potes- 
c tate punctorum hanc Poesin, non dissyllabis, sed 
c sex temporum pedibus constare certum est. Hanc 
* enim si Poesin metiamur dissyllabis pedibus, om- 
€ ma pedum genera, et duorum et trium tempo- 
6 rum, cum spondseo quatuor temporum, ordine 
' tumultuario, et contra naturam omnis rationalis 

1 Sect. 9. * He means Bishop Hare. 


5 Poeseos, se invicem sequentur : quod omnino ab- 

* surdum est. Si vero pedibus sex temporum hanc 
t Poesin metianiur, tota erit rationalis et harmo- 

* nica, pedibus inter se mutuo convenientibus 
€ quantitatis parilitate ; pedes quippe omnes, qui 

* ejusdem temporis sunt, posse misceri veteresque 
e miscendos judicasse, et horum mixtione versus 

* composites condidisse, sat notum est ; omnes 
'? itaque sex temporum pedes omnibus totidem 
' temporum pedibus copulari queant. Haec est 
;' vera dimensio hujus Poeseos, et ex hac dimen- 
1 sione liquet Grsecorum Poesin, prsecipue Pindari, 

* eandem esse cum Lyrica, apud Hebraeos, Poesi.' 

He then gives the first Psalm in the original 
Hebrew words, but the usual Italic character, in- 
termixing with that, however, in some instances, 
the Hebrew character Ayn, for the purpose of ex- 
pressing the strong aspirate, which could not be 
represented in the Italic. To this Psalm he gives 
the following title : ( Psalm I. Met rum, quod 

* apud Grsecos Ionicum compositum audiebat, et 
1 a Grsecis primitus ab-Hebrseis deductum.' Then 
succeeds the Psalm, divided by him into feet, and. 
with the quantities marked over each syllable. 

It is, however, to be remarked, that the mode 
in which the verses of this Psalm are regulated, 
wherever it was originally procured, seems in it- 
self extremely questionable, because it produces 
Such a strange unaccountable variety of length •; 
j§om_e of the verses being rendered by it only two 
feet or metres in length, some three, and some 



f6ur ; and this distribution makes the verses 
amount in the whole to 17 in number. On an 
experiment made on them, according to the quan- 
tities marked by Manwaring, it should seem that 
they are capable of an equal division into lines of 
four feet each, that they would then amount to 
ten verses, and that the feet employed would 
be these : 













































Manwaring says, and assigns for it a very good 
reason, that they are only to be scanned by feet 
or metres of six times ; and since, when thus re- 
gulated and divided into verses of four feet, as 
above mentioned, they precisely exhibit the model 
of the Greek and Latin Pseonic or Bacchiac, and 
of the Choriambic, it has been thought necessary 
to give them here, in both states, as they stand 
in Manwaring, and according to the proposed re- 
gulation above 1 . 

1 It is a fact very rarely, if at all, known, though ne- 
cessary to be stated, in order to prevent an unreasonable oppo- 


The manner in which Manwaring regulates it, 
is this : 

s 1. ashre | aishasher 

€ % Lohalachba I i?atsatlireshalm 

sition, on any occasion, to the proposal of a better arrange- 
ment or division of the verses, in any poetical work, that the 
term verse, now usually implying a line restricted within the 
compass of a certain number of poetical feet and syllables, re- 
gulated by the laws of metre and Prosodia, had at first no such 
signification. Originally derived from the Latin verb, verto, to 
turn, it only denoted a return of the text in a fresh line ; and so 
it is applied, when speaking of works decidedly in prose. Brenc- 
man, in his Historia Pandectarum, seu Fatum Exemplaris 
Florentini, 4to. Trajecti ad Rhenum, 1722, p. 95, describing 
the Florentine manuscript of the Pandects, supposed to be of 
the sixth century, ibid. p. 11, says, * Caeterum quselibet pagina 

* in duas columnas dividitur, quae singular versus quadraginta 

* quinque continent. Quod si, ait Contius, ad Justinianeura 

* exemplar descriptse sunt Pandectce Florentine, hujusmodi 

* brevibus lineis constare debent, quod erit, si per duas co« 

* lumnas singula? paginae sint descriptae, quod adhuc a nemine, 

* cum quo fuerim, discere contigit. Ita Contius agens de nu- 

* mero versuum, quos in Pandectis esse asserit Justinianus. Sed 

* per centum quinquaginta millia versuum, quibus Imperator 

* Pandectas constare dicit, Duarenus intelligit membra orationis 
' integra, sive periodos, et morem numerandi versus veteribus 

* familiarem fuisse contendit : alii vero, non periodos, sed 

* lineas, cum Contio intelligunt. Denique singuli versus, sive 

* lineae, exemplaris Florentini continent literas, praeter propter 
' triginta, hoc enim certo definiri non potest, cum literas alia 

* alias majores sint, ipsaque scriptura nunc densior inveniatur, 

* nunc laxior. 

< Insuper singularum paginarum intercolumnium, ut et mar- 

* gines, item versus singuli, circino distributi descriptique 

* fuerunt.' 

There cannot surely be a more complete answer than this, 
to any supposed authority of manuscripts or ancient copies, ia 


* 3. ubhedherechha | taimlo | Mmad 
6 4, ubhemoshabh | letsimlo | jashab 

* 5. Kiimbetho | rathadhonai 
' 6. Hhephtsoubhe | thorathd 
6 7. jehgejomam | valaila 

* 8. vehajake | yetshathul 

c 9. Palpalghema | jimasherperjd 

10. jettenberitto j vpalehu 

11. Lojibbolve | colasherjara | Sejatsliach 
\% Lochenhar | reshaimki 

13. micamniotsasher | liddephennurualih 

14. tfalkenlo ] jakumure | Shaimbammish | pat 

15. vehhattaim ba | yadhathtsadiklm 

16. Kijodhe | aJ?adhonai | derechtsadiklm 

17. vedherechresha I imtobhedh.'* 

But the following seems a more rational di- 
vision : 

Ashre a|ishasher lo|haiachba yatjsathreshaim 
Ubhedherech|ha taim|lo yamad | ubhemoshabh 

regard to the division of verses, according to measure and 
quantity, unless that division be confirmed and supported by 
its correspondence with the exact rules of Prosodia. 

Victorinus, edit. Putsch. col. 24-99, says still more expressly : 

* Versus herous hexameter Epos dicatur. Apud nos autem 

* versus dictus est a versuris, id est, a repetita scriptura, ea ex 
J parte, in quam desinit. Primis enim temporibus, sicut quidarn 
' asserunt, sic soliti erant scribere, ut cum a sinistra parte 

* initium facere coepissent, et duxissent ad dextram, sequentem 

* versum a dextra parte inchoantes ad sinistram perducerent, 

* quem morem ferunt custodire adhuc in suis Uteris Rusticos, 

* Hoc autem genus scriptural dicebant Bustrophen, a bourn ver- 

* satione; unde adhuc in arando, ubi desinit sulcus et unde 

* alter inchoatur, versura proprio vocabulo nuncupatur,' 

32 an inquiry mra 

Letsimlo | jashab ki|imbetho rajthadhonai 
Hhephtsoubhe | thoratho | jehgejomam | valaila 
Vehajake | tfetshathul | i'alpalghema | jimasherperjd 
Jettenbei/itto | vtfalehu | lojibbolve | colasherjaya 
Sejatsliach | lochenhar | reshaimkl | ltncamraotsasher 
Liddephennuruahh | tfalkenlo | jakumure | Shalmbainmisb 
Pat vehhatta|im ba #adha|thtsadlkim | kijodhe 
Atfadhonai | derechtsadlkim | vedherechresha [ Imtobliedh 

By this method the lines are reduced to ten, 
and are all tetrameters. Except in four instances, 
the feet are all either of five or six short syllables 
in value, and those four are each equal to seven. 

This specimen does not authorize the idea, 
that any kinds of poetical licences were used ; for 
the syllables seem all regulated by their natural 
quantities ; nor are they apparently even affected, 
as to quantity, by the artificial position of two 
consonants following a vowel, or two vowels fol- 
lowing each other ; and indeed, on the contrary, 
Bishop Lowth, p. 472, De Sacra Poesi Hebraeo- 
rum, remarks, that, whenever the same word oc- 
curs in Hebrew Poetry, it is always of the same 
quantity, which seems to imply a constant atten? 
tion to rule. 

The same author, Bishop Lowth m i says, p. 37, 
that the Hebrew verses are of different lengths, 
that the shortest usually contain six or seven syl- 
lables, and that the longest extend to about twice 

^ De Sacra Poesi Hebrasorum, edit. Oxon. 1775, third edit 



as many. On the 117th Psalm, which he gives in 
Hebrew, p. 470, he remarks that the feet in He- 
brew were not all dissyllables; for that, in 
the lines of Psalm 111, some words, which he 
points out, are Dactyls, others Anapaests ; and 
noticing 1 , p. 472, that the quantity of the same 
word, whenever it occurs, is always the same, 
he gives instances of words, in the before-men* 
tioned Psalm, which are Iambuses, one a Trochee, 
another an Anapaest, a third an Ampliimacer (or 
Cretic), and a fourth an Amphibrachys. 

Of the verses he says, p. 472, that some are 
Trochaic, admitting a Dactyl ; others Iambic, re- 
ceiving an Anapaest; that those lines which con- 
tain an equal number of syllables, are more fre- 
quently Iambic, but sometimes Trochaic ; and 
those which have an unequal number are more 
frequently Trochaic, but sometimes Iambic. Fur- 
ther on, he speaks of one verse as Trochaic Di- 
meter catalectic, the next as Trochaic Dimeter aca- 
talectic ; and observes, that, in another place, 
one verse is Iambic Dimeter hypercatalectic, the 
next an Iambic Dimeter catalectic. To this he 
adds the mention of one place, where, as he him- 
self remarks, the verses are all of one length as 
to syllables, and of the same number of feet ; and 
are besides Iambic K 

Bishop Lowth denies, in which he appears to 

1 He speaks, p. 382, of two Psalms, which, he says, agree 
yery strongly with the Greek Poetry. 


be correct, that the feet in Hebrew Poetry were 
dissyllables ; but the evidence he adduces does 
not prove the fact ; for he says, that some words 
which he mentions are Dactyls, others Anapaests, 
some Iambuses, one a Trochee, another an Amphi- 
macer, or Cretic, and another an Amphibrachys. 
Now, unless he had shown that each word con- 
stituted a separate foot or metre, and no more, it 
is plain he has not ascertained the fact ; for the 
same word, if of more than two syllables, might 
have been divided into two feet, part being in 
one, and part in the other : neither is it possib^ 
that, in the same poem, an Amphimacer or Cretic 
can occur with the Trochee or Iambus, as if it 
were no more than equivalent to each of these, 
when in fact it exceeds them so much. 

If the opinions of Josephus and St, Jerorn are 
admitted, and why they should not be so received, 
no substantial reason can be given, it is plain that 
the models of all the various sorts of verse among 
the Greeks are to be found existing much earlier 
among the Hebrews: for Moses certainly flourish- 
ed between 1513 and 1459 years before our Sa- 
viour m ; whereas, Homer did not live till 880 
years before Christ n , and Hesiod about the same 

m Saxii Onomasticon Lit. p. 5. In the subsequent edit, of 
1775, vol, i. p. 4, he is placed 1496 years before Christ. 

n Ibid. p. 5. In the subsequent edit, he is placed 973. 
Vol. i. p. 11. 


time : David existed 1053 before Christ p : Ar- 
chilochus, the earliest Greek lyric poet, between 
713 and 711^; Sappho, between 602 and 594 r ; 
Alcaeus, 602 s ; Simonides, 529 l ; and Pindar, be- 
tween 486 and 478 ». 

From the examples of Poetry in the Scriptures, 
therefore, the Greeks most certainly derived the 
rules by which the feet and length of their verses 
were determined ; but those for the quantities of 
the syllables naturally sprung* from the nature and 
genius of the Greek language itself. From the 
accounts both of Josephus and St. Jerom, as ex- 
emplified in the case of the poems of Moses, it 
should, however, appear, that, among the He- 
brews originally, as well as among the Greeks, 
their subsequent imitators, in the instances of 
Homer and Hesiod, Hexameter verse was the ear- 
liest species in use : nor is it found that, till the 
time of David, among the Jews, 406 years after 
Moses, and of Archilochus, among the Greeks, 
169 years after Homer, lyric Poetry had been re- 
gularly introduced. 

° Saxii Onomast. Lit. p. 5. In the subsequent edit. vol. i. 
p. 12, he occurs 909 years before Christ. 

p Ibid. p. 5. See also edit. 1775, vol. i. p. 9. 

<» Ibid. p. 6. See also edit. 1775, vol. i. p. 44. 

* Ibid. p. 6. In the subsequent edit. vol. i. p. 18, she is 
placed between 602 and 600. 

9 Ibid. p. 6. See also edit. 1775, vol. i. p. 17. 

*' Ibid. p. 7. See also edit. 1775, vol. i, p. 25. 

u Ibid. p. 7. See also edit. 1775, vol. i. p. 33, but it there 
stands 479, 

D 2 


In the case of Moses and David, it is surely 
not too much to say, that the invention of Poetry 
proceeded from immediate Inspiration from the 
divine Being; and particularly as we are expressly 
told in the Scriptures, that a similar communica- 
tion of the divine will did most certainly actually 
take place, as to the science of Architecture, in 
the instance of Solomon s temple \ 

x < Then David gave to Solomon his son the pattern of the 

* porch, and of the houses thereof, and of the treasuries thereof^ 
6 and of .the upper chambers thereof, and of the inner parlours 
4 thereof, and of the place of the mercy-seat, and the pat« 

* tern of all, that he had by the Spirit, of the courts of the 
4 house of the Lord, and of all the chambers round about, of 
' the treasuries of the house of God, and of the treasuries of 

* the dedicate things.' 1 Chron. xxviii. 11, 12.—' All this,' said 
David, ' the Lord made me understand in writing by his hand 
< upon me ; even all the works of this pattern.* Ibidc v. 19, 


There can be but three Sorts of Poetry. 

Quintilian, his opinion of the necessity of a knowledge of 
Music to a Grammarian. — Aristotle, his opinion as to the 
three sorts of rhythmical time. — Quintilian's idea on the 
same point.— Aristides Quintilianus, his sentiments — Vic- 
torinus, his idea. — Ilhythmus and Metre, how they differ. — 
Diomedes, his opinion. — There can be but three sorts of Ver- 
sification substantially differing. — All metrical feet must be 
ranged by their proportions, not number of syllables.— The 
whole system of feet thus placed. 

Quintilian has properly remarked, which, in- 
deed, a competent share of common sense and 
attention to the point would, without his assist- 
ance, have suggested, that a Grammarian, desti- 
tute of a knowledge of Music, was but very ill 
qualified for the office of discussing the nature of 
Poetry, because the inquiry must necessarily lead 
him to the investigation of the principles of Rhyth- 
mus and Metre ?. He did not here mean to be 

y ' Turn nee citra Musicen, Grammatice potest esse perfecta 9 
' cum ei de Metris, Rhythmisque dicendum est.' M. Fab. 
Quintil. Inst. Orat. 1. i. c. 4. And Priscian has distinctly ad- 
mitted the use of a knowledge of music, in his tract i De 
* Versibus Comieis, inter Gram. Lat. Auctores a Putschio,' when 


understood as requiring that a Grammarian should 
possess a degree of science sufficient to explain 
and unriddle the perplexities and intricacies which 
the writers of the middle ages have since intro- 
duced into that, as well as into all other branches 
of science, which they professed to teach : neither 
did he conceive so much musical erudition requi- 
site for this purpose, as would be adequate to the 
settling and adjusting the mathematical ratios 
and proportion of one sound to another ; but he 
merely intended to recommend the acquisition of 
so much intelligence, as should give him a prac- 
tical knowledge of its principles, and make him 
fully acquainted with the nature of musical Time, 
on which that in Poetry is unquestionably built. 

Aristotle, who died at the age of 63, 322 years 
before Christ 2 , endeavouring to ascertain what 
Rhythmus should be used for public speakings 
first mentions the Heroic, afterwards the Iambus 
and Trochee, and then speaks to the following ef- 
fect as to the Pseon, the third sort : ' The remain- 
6 ing sort is the Pseon, which many orators use, 
6 taking example from Thrasymmachus, though 

be says, as he does col. 1327: 'His rgitur exemp'lis facillime 
*• diligentes omnium possunt comoediarum metra eomprehendere, 
£ et versus, si quos imperitia scriptorum confudit, ad integrum 
4 restituere Musicse locum.' How Rhythmus and Metre differ 
from each other, will be seen in a subsequent note. 

2 Saxius, in his Onomast- Lit. vol. i. p. 76, places him 341 
years before Christ. Moreri, in his Dictionary, on the autho- 
rity of Diogenes Laertius, &c. gives the date as in the text. 


c they are unable to say of what kind it was. But 

* the Paean a is the third sort, and follows these 
€ Rhythmuses just spoken of; for it contains in it- 
( self the proportion of Three to Two, Of those 
' just mentioned, one kind, namely, the Heroic, is 

* as One to One ; but the other, namely, the lam- 
€ bus and Trochee b 3 is as Two to One. To these 

* proportions succeeds that which is called Sesqui- 
( altera, and this is the Paean e .' 

a It is the custom of late, though it seems to need justifica- 
tion, to term this foot the Paeon, instead of Paean ; but Aris- 
totle evidently mentions it as the Paean. It is true, that, in. 
modern times, the word Paean, because it had among the an- 
cients that, as one of its significations, is injudiciously re- 
stricted, as the name of the hymns to Apollo alone. In those 
hymns it is probable that this very foot might be introduced ; for 
the Paeon did actually occur in the hymns to Bacchus. See an 
instance in two Bacchiac or Paeonic lines, inserted in Sect. VI, 
of this work, from Athenaeus i and Bacchus and the Sun, or, 
in other words, Bacchus and Apollo, were originally the same. 
Macrobius, book i. chap. 17. 

b Aristotle here properly reckons the Iambus and Trochee 
as of the same proportion, and therefore correctly considers 
them both as forming but one kind of Rhythmus. This is an 
important fact on the subject of Metre. So does Quintilian — see 
a passage from him in the next note. 

c ' Ato pua^cov deT z%zi,v rov Xoyov } [xzTgoy de jayi : 'xolnpcx. y<x,o i$-a** 
' pvQpov os [xv a^piowj rSro dl eV«*, sav pf%f' T« •». Twv dt pi/S^wy, o ptv s 
' *?££«J;?, asuvoi Y.aA Xuxt</COJ, hoc) ctgiAOvic&g diO[j,svoc» O dt ', at>T« 

* Er*v n Xsijtj n twv toXXSv* ho [xiXiroc TravTwy rm psTguv toty&BToi 
' ffl-yyovroci \iyovTi;' d~t7 ds cTt^yomrcc ytvicrZon, kxi \y.?%crai. 'O oz 

* Tooxjxios, x.ogd'oc.xiKWTZPos* dn^oi oe to. TET^a^ST^ix* ifi yoi^ r r°X-?°t 
pvVfxog to, nr^fxiT foe* AznriTO'A ds. wc/ao.?, w z^/puivTo / XEy V'^o Gpcccrv 

* P"-X 0V °M^ t V EVQ - ^ X ^X 0V ^ Xs'yEiV, Xtq *IV. "Eft ol T?ITG$ 7TUISCV, X.<X,l 
t^OjUSVOS TW it3YI]ii.SYM T|*a «y<»p TpCs dvo sr»v IKUMV OS, fAtV cV 7/pa$ 

D 4 


Aristides Quintilianus, a writer on Music, cer- 
tainly prior to Ptolomy, another writer on Music, 

iv* o dc, dvo 7? sog sv* switch d£ ruiv \6ywj t&txv b ^jui&A/oj* Srog d£ eV'v o 

' 7r<xiay. Oi jaev cuy «AXot £iC4 ra rd u^jj.sva> 9 kQ&eqi, stai Sioti [/.irgixol' 

6 <3e ora/ay, taj7TT£os* c^aro fxCvov <ydp &k e-* /^et^cv twv pwQevTuv puQuwv* 

* w$-£ jiiaXira XavSavstv.' — .* Quamobrem Rythmtim oportet habere 
s oration-em, non aretem Metrum : sic enim poema erit : 

* Neque tamen Rhythraum exquisite habere oportet: Id autern 
*' erit, si quadamtenus sit, modumque teneat. Ex Rhythmis 

* vero Herous, est grandis, et clausulam tardam habens, et 

* harmoniae indigens. Iambus autem, est ipsa vulgi locutio, 
c qua humilior est. Quamobrem maxime prae omnibus metris 
e edits lambica temere fundunt ii, qui dicunt : Oportebat autem 
f sermonem grandiorem effici, et auditorem percellere. Tro- 

* chaeus autem, ad saltationem Cordacem propius accedit: Id 
6 perspicuum faciunt Tetrametra ex eodem constituta: Nam Te- 
e trametra, sunt volubilis Rhythmus. Reliquus vero est Paean 
"' quo plerique Oratores usi sunt, initio ducto a Thrasymacho ; 
' non potuerunt vero dicere, Quinam esset. Est autem Paean 

* genus tertium, et consequens iis Rhythmis, qui dicti sunt : 

* Habet enim se, ut duo ad tria : Illorum autem unum quidem, 

* genus sc, Herous, est ut unum ad unum ; alteram vero, ut 
4 Iambus et Trochceus, est ut duo ad unum : Rationibus autem 
6 his consequens est ea, quce dicitur Sesqui-altera : Haec autem 

* est ipse Paean, Ac alii quidem Rbythmi abjiciendi erunt, turn 

* ob ea utique quae dicta sunt, turn quia sunt Metris aptiores : 
' Paean vero sumendus : Ab hoc enim solo ex omnibus qui dicti 
' sunt Rhythmis, non fit Metrum ; ita ut auditorem maxime 

* lateat.' — Aristotelis De Pthetorica, a Goulston, 4to. Lond. 
1696, p. W5. 

Quintilian, edit. 8vo. Lond. 1641, p. 444, says, ' Nam 

* Rliythmi, id est, numeri, spatio temporum consistent, Metra 
' etiam ordine ; ideoque alteram esse quantitatis videtur, alte- 

* ram qualitatis.' In the same place he says, * P.yfy-ic'j aut par est, 
1 ut dactylus, unam enim syllabam parem brevibus habet. Est 
4 quidam vis eadem et aliis pedibus, sed nomen illud tenet. 

* Longam esse duorum temporum, brevem unius, etiam pueri 
■* sciunt. Aut sescuplex, ut Paeon, cujus vis est ex longa et 


which last person lived in the year 139 d of the 
Christian sera, says, in a passage, the original 
words of which are given in the note e , that there 
are three sorts of Rhythmical time, Equal, Sesqui- 
alteral, and Duple. He says that some added also 
the Supertertian, and that all these kinds were 
computed from the magnitude of their times : for 
One, says he, compared to itself produces the pro- 
portion of Equality ; Two to One, Duple ; Three to 
Two, Sesquialteral ; Four to Three, Supertertian. 
Victorinus, who lived about 362 years after 
the birth of our Saviour f , speaks, in a chapter 

* tribus brevibus, quique ei contrarius, ex tribus brevibus et 
' longa, vel alio quoquo modo tempora tria ad duo relata sescu- 
.' plum faciunt. Aut duplex, ut Iambus, nam est ex brevi et 

* longa, quique est ei contrarius.' 

d Saxii Onomasticon Lit. p. 16 & 17. In the subsequent edi- 
tion, Ptolomy is placed, vol. i. p. 298, between the years of 
our Lord 123 and 126. 

e ' Tim TOivyv* Iri ^ufyxiKci rpla.' ro iVov. to '•njMoXiov, to SirrXoicricv, 
i irfQO-TiQla.o'i of TiVEj xa,t 70 £7t/t^to>. a-rro tx [AtyiQuc; rw p^po'va/j 

* <7tmr«/^ya- o (tzv yxp Etj tt$o: tcivrov crvyy.fwO'JAvot; Toy trig icroTriTqg yinci 
' Xoyov. o 6: dfUTzpo; trpoq rev Eva, Toy StTrXczfiov* o $t y', irpcs T« dvo Tot 

* ■yy.ioXiov. o ob ¥ Tpoj y\ tov ett/t^tov.' — * Itaque genera rhythmica 
.' sunt tria : iEquale, Sesquialterum, Duplum ; addunt aliqui 

* et Supertertium : quae a temporum magnitudine constituuntur. 

* Unum enim sibi ipsi comparatum sequalitatis gignit rationem. 

* Duo ad unum, duplam. Tria ad duo, sesquialteram. Qua- 

* tuor ad tria, supertertiam,' — Aristides Quintiiianus De Mu- 
sica, inter Antiquae Musicas Auctores septem a Meibomio, 4tc. 
Amst. 1652, vol. ii. p. 34. 

f Saxii Onomasticon Literarium, Svo. Trajecti ad Rhenum, 
.1759, p. 24-. In the subsequent edit, vol. i. p. 407, he is placed 
in the year 355. 


Be Rhy ih ino s, to the same effect ; for he says 
that there are three different sorts of Rhvthmuses h , 

8 c Rhythmorum autem his esse differentias volunt, in Dae- 
4 tylo, lambo, et Paeone, quae fiunt per Arsin et Thesin. Nam 

* Dactvlus aequa temporum divisione taxatur, ut et Anapaestus ; 
« uterque nam pes quatuor temporum est. Nam ut longa prima 

* Dactyli duabus brevibus insequentibus par sibi et aequalis est, 

* idem et in Anapaesto fit, ut initium fini simile inveniatur ; et 
4 dicunt in Arsi et Thesi aequalem rationem io-ov Xoyoy. Idem 

* etiara in Dipodia, facta conjugatione binum pedum, per Clio- 

* riambum et Antispastum, quia quantum in sublatione habet 
4 tantundem in positione ; et idem apud Graecos sequalis id est 
1 urofvQpoq dieitur. Secundus autem Rhythmus in lambo dupli 
' ratione subsistit, qua Trochaica, et utraque lonica, mono- 

* semos. Unius nam temporis Arsis ad disemon Thesin compa- 

* ratur. Etenim Iambus a brevi syllaba incipit, quae est unius 

* temporis, et in longam desinit, quae est temporum duorum. 

* Trochaeus autem contra. Eadem et in lonicis metris dupli 
c ratione versatur. Nam Ionicus wn-o ^ci^ovo^ incipit a duabus 

* longis et in duas desinit breves. Ionicus autem ocko eXao-o-ovo?, 

< a brevibus incipiens, in longas desinit. Erit itaque inter hos 
c disemos ad tetrasemon Arsis ad Thesin. Quia unam partem 

* in sublatione habet, duas in positione, seu contra. Ergo 
' Iambica et Trochaica metra, quae in duplici ratione sunt po- 
' sita, facta conjugatione binum pedum ad legem quadrupli 

* vocabantur. Tertius autem Rhythmus, qui Pseonicus a Mu- 
i sicis dieitur, hemiolia subsistit, quae est sesquipli ratio. He- 

* miolium dicunt numerum, qui tantundem habeat quantum 
« alius et dimidium amplius, ut si compares tres et duo ; nam 
6 in tribus, et duo et eorum dimidium continetur, quod cum 
« evenit Trisemos Arsis ad Disemon Thesin accipilur, i. tres 

* partes in sublatione habent, duas in positione, seu contra; 
6 quam rationem maxime incurrunt Paeonici versus et Bacchii 
6 ita nobis metra gradientibus, ut Paeonicus servetur Rhyth- 

* in us. Hae sunt tres partitiones, quae continuam pyO/xowofrav fa- 

< ciunt.' — Victorinus, inter Grammaticae Latinae Auctores an- 
tiqui, a Putsch io, 4to. Hanovise, 1605, col. 2484. 

h Great confusion is observable in the writings of some au- 


and that these are exhibited in the Dactyl, the 
Iambus, and the Pseon ; that the Dactyl and Ana- 
paest are both equal in time; for that each of 
them is of four times, and that the same propor- 
tion takes place in the conjunction of two feet, as 
in the (phoriambus and Antispast for instance, 
which is termed equal proportion. The second 
sort of Rhythmus subsists in the Iambus in duple 
proportion, which is also the proportion of Tro- 
chaic feet, and also of both the lonici ; and Iam- 
bic and Trochaic, which depend on duple propor- 
tion, were, by the conjunction of two feet, referred 
to the rule of quadruple 1 . The third sort of 

thors, between the terms Rhythmus and Metre, in consequence 
of which, it is difficult to ascertain what some of them under- 
stood ^by the former appellation. Quintilian, as has been seen 
in a former note, inserted p. 40, above, says, very properly 
and correctly, * Rhythmi, id est, numeri, spatio temporum 
consistunt, Metrum etiam ordine.' To apply this to heroic 
hexameter verse, it may be truly said, that the Rhythmus 
of that is equal, as being either one long to one long syl- 
lable, or one long to two short; but it is Metre that tells 
us (as will hereafter be found the fact, by instances produced 
from Homer, Virgil, and Horace — see Sect. IX.), that these pro- 
portions may be applied in the use of the Dactyl, the Spondee, 
the Anapaest, the Amphibrachys, and the Proceleusma. 

1 This passage is obscure, but may be explained from the 
context. He says that the proportion of the Iambus is duple, 
for that it begins with a short syllable and ends with a long one; 
that the two lonici are also of duple proportion, because one 
begins with two short syllables, and ends with two long ones, 
and the other is just the reverse ; that the proportion of each 
of these is as two to four; and that the Iambus and Trochee, 
being each of them, as they are, of dupie proportion, may, by a 
combination or conjunction of two feet, be rendered of the pro- 


Rhythmus, which by musicians is called the 
Pceonie, is, as he says, in the proportion of Three 
to Two, and comprehends Pseonic and Bacchiac 
verses. This is very briefly the general substance 
of the passage, so far as it is material to the pre- 
sent purpose; but the very words of the whole, 
including, as it also does, the author s further ex- 
planations of the above particulars, may be seen 
in the note before inserted. 

Diomedes, also, who is supposed to have lived 
about the year of our Lord 412 k , speaks thus: 
c Atque, excepto Amphibracho et Epitrito, quorum 
€ alteram tripla, alteram Epitrita divisione parti- 
6 mur, universarum pedum trina conditio reperitur. 
€ In aliis enim sequa divisio est, in aliis dupla, in 
( aliis sescupla. Prima Dactylica, secunda lam- 
6 bica, tertia Pseonica nominatur V 

From these passages it is evident, that, how- 
ever these sorts may have been since subdivided, 
there can be in fact but three species of Versifica- 
tion substantially differing from each other ; for 
the fourth, mentioned by Aristides, is only no- 
ticed by him, as contended for by some persons, 
and he does not acknowledge it in the number of 

portion of two to four, which he calls quadruple, because one 
of the two terms compared with each other consists of the num- 
ber four. 

k He is placed by Saxius, in his Onomasticon Literariura, 
Svo. Trajecti ad Rhenum, ]759, p. 29, between the years 410 
and 412 after our Saviour's birth, and so he stands in the subse- 
quent edit. vol. i. p. 481. 

1 Diomedes, inter Grammatics Latinss Auctores antiqui, 
a Putschio,. ito. Hanovisc* 1605, col. 476, 



those allowable. All metrical feet must, there- 
fore, be ranged under one or other of the above 
three proportions ; and of course ought to be classed 
and regulated in the following manner, by the 
proportions of Jong and short quantities to each 
other, and not by the number of syllables, as 
they have frequently, but incorrectly and injudi- 
ciously, been placed: 


Pyrrhichius . . . 
' Spondee 



Proceleusma . , 

t Dactyl 

' Antispast .... 


Di-Iambus . . . 

Di-Trochee .. 
h Choriarnbus . . 


v/w» /"Trochee ..... 

-< Iambus 

, w _ V. Tribrachys . . . 
f Molossus .... 

Di-Tribrachys < 
Di-Trochee. . . 
Di-Iambus . . . 
Choriambus . . 
Antispast .... 
Ionicus Major 
Ionicus Minor 



_^ /"AmphimacerorCretic. 
w «i Bacchius 

Antibacchius ... _ -\> 

Paeon 1 .uuu 

Paeon 2 u_ U u 

Paeon 3 «w_v. 

Paeon 4 wv/w _ 

Trib. & Pynhich. ^ ^ u w^ a 

•V V », ^ 

In the above list are comprised, with the ex- 
ception of the four Epitrituses and the Di-spondee, 
all those sorts of feet which are enumerated as 
poetical, in the preliminary tract on that subject, 

m It is very evident, that, in the original formation and set- 
tlement of these several kinds of feet, the musical principle of 
changing one long quantity for two short, and of transposing 
the long and short quantities, in any order, provided they did 
not in the whole exceed, or fall short of, the requisite value, 
has been the foundation of all : and this fact appears still more 
plainly from the circumstance, that the short quantities are 
often interrupted by the intervention of long ones between. 


prefixed to the Gracilis ad Parnassum n . As the 
proportion of each of the Epitrituses is as Three 
to Four, and consequently Supertertian, a propor- 
tion which Aristides Quintilianus does not allow 
as rhythmical, it was thought useless to notice 
them : and it may be further observed, that the 
Pyrrhiehius, although of that proportion which 
constitutes equality, is yet so confined, that it 
admits of no variety, and, therefore, as producing 
a tiresome monotony, seems hardly calculated to 
be used singly, as a simple uncompounded and in- 
dependent foot °. 

The Di-spondee is only a repetition of the ori- 
ginal Spondee ; but, to the above list should be 
added, under each head, all such feet as may be 

n This tract, which is but one page, is entitled, ' Tractatus 

* brevis ac dilucidus de vario Pedum et Versuum genere;' but, 
as it only treats of the various feet, and nothing is said, as pro- 
mised in its title, as to the kinds of verse, there is reason to 
suspect it to be but the former part of one prefixed to some 
earlier edition, and which probably corresponded in its contents 
with what the above title promises ; for, in an edition of the 
Gradus ad Parnassum, published by Paul Aler, a Jesuit, se- 
cond edit. 12mo. Coloniae Agrip. 1702, after a l Syllabus brevis 
' ac dilucidus variorum Pedum Metricorum,' there is also pre- 
fixed to the work itself a tract, consisting of two pages, pro- 
bably and apparently taken from some earlier edition, and en- 
titled, < Tractatus brevis de praecipujs Carminum generibus et 

* eorum materia.' By accident, therefore, either what related 
to the verses was probably omitted, or, if that omission was 
Intentional, the words in the title were improperly retained. 

Ruddiman, Grammatics Institutiones, 12mo. Edinb. 1756, 
p. 15$, has given from Ausonius, Parental? 27? four lines, con- 
sisting all of the Pyrrhiehius* 


produced from the rest, by substituting or ex- 
changing two short syllables for one long, or on8 
long for two short. Any of the feet circumflexed 
together, in the above list, may be used in ex- 
change for each other, because they are all pre- 
cisely of the same time in the whole, as two short 
syllables are universally known to be equal to one 
long p. 

p ' Longam esse duorum temporum, brevem unius, etiam 
6 pueri sciunt.' Quintilian, Institutiones, edit. 8vo. Lond. 164-1, 
p. 444. — * Nam ubicunque syllaba longa est, ibi duo breves 
i poni possunt.' Yictorinus, edit. Putsch, col. 257.L 


Heroic, the first Sort of Poetry. 

Linus first brought learning into Greece from Phoenicia.— 
Poems written by him in Hexameter verse. — Orpheus, poems 
written by him. — He is said to have been a great promoter, 
if not the inventor, of the heathen mythology— and to have 
first introduced the rites of Bacchus. — The authority of his 
poems doubtful, as they have been ascribed to Onomacritus. 
— Linus, Musaeus, Homer, and Hesiod, all wrote in Hexa- 
meter verse. — Pentameter verse — very doubtful by whom 
invented, as Horace says. — Ascribed to Pythagoras, Mim- 
nermus, and Grtugen; but used by Archilochus. — An in- 
stance of it from him. — Another referred to. — Probably in- 
vented between the time of Hesiod and Archilochus ; but 
certainly before Pythagoras and Mimnermus.— Used by 
Tyrtaeus, Mimnermus, and Solon. 

Linus, the preceptor of Orpheus f! , a Phoenician 
by birth, is reported to have been the first who 
brought learning from Phoenicia into Greece r , 

9 Saxius Onom. Lit. vol. i. p. 7. 

r ' AtVojJ X«X;c*o£tf£ 3 AkoWuvoc Tsp4> j^op-,^. oi oe 'A/A^Uju.apy y.ocl 
■ 0.vptxvict<;. oi ds Ep^cy Jtoti Qupav/o-j. Asysrou cis tt^wtoj &toj asro 4>o»v/>ir<; 
' ypa^A//.a.T# tt$ &\\nvo!,$ kyccyih. ysvsova* os -/.ca HpajcXey? dtdaVxaAof 
' ypx^arwy. noct t*ij Xvftx.rig<?Yi$ itfxrog yivittcci 'flys^tav.' SuidaS, 

art. Aivos, edit. fo. Basil, 1544. In the Poetae Minores Gracci, 
p. 510, the above account from Suidas is thus incorrectly 
abridged, and confessed to be taken E Suida. ' De Lino, 


Gale s speaks of him, as having written a poem on 
the heathen mythology, which, he says, is evi- 
dently borrowed from the Scriptures, and the his- 
tories of the Jewish church. Ten lines, by Linus, 
on Prudence, and two lines on Hope, all Hexa- 
meters, occur among the Poetse Minores Graeci, 
a Rad. Winterton, 12mo. Cantabrigiae, 1635, 
p. 510; which collection professes to follow Henry 
Stephens's edition in folio, 1566, and Crispins 
edition, in 12mo. of the year 1600 K 

Orpheus, who lived 1255 years before our Sa- 
viour u , wrote a poem on the wars of the Titans, 
and another on the Argonautic expedition. Three 
lines of this last are inserted by Gale x , from 
which it appears, that that poem also was in Hex- 
ameter verse. In the above-mentioned collection^ 
p. 503, &c. are three poems by Orpheus : the 
first contains thirty-eight lines ; the second, thir- 
teen ; and the third, six; but all Hexameters. 
They all seem comprehended under the general 

* Linus Chalcidensis primus literas ex Phoenicia ad Grsecos 

* attulisse, Herculemque literas docuisse, et inter Lyricos 
' Poetas princeps extitisse, dicitur.' It may be doubted whether 
the latter part is correctly rendered, and whether Trpwfoj there, 
does not, as above, also signify the earliest in time, instead of 
princeps, or the chief, as it here stands rendered. 

s Gale's Court of the Gentiles, part i. book in. p. 4. 

1 See the end of the prefatory advertisement, entitled; 

* Lectori candido.' 

u Saxius Onomasticon Literarium, 8vo. Trajecti ad Rhe- 
num, 1759, p. 5. See also edit. 1775, vol. i. p. 7. 
* Court of the Gentiles, part i. book iii. p. 5* 



title of lisp ©c#, and are consequently addresses 
to the divine Being ; but, in the second, he speaks 
of Winter as advancing with the cold clouds, which 
drunken Bacchus had formerly dispersed in the 
time of Autumn ; and he therefore most evidently 
considers Bacchus as the Sun?. Gale says, part j. 
book iii. p. 5, that Orpheus was a great promoter, 
if not the inventor, of the heathen mythology z ; 
and that he is also said to have been the first who 
brought into Greece the rites of Bacchus. Tatian 
has said, that the poems which pass under the 
name of Orpheus, are reported to have been com- 
posed by Onomacrittfs the Athenian, who lived 
under the government of Pisistratus's sons, about 
the 50th Olympiad ; but Gale % who mentions 
this circumstance, still appears to consider them as 
the productions of Orpheus, which others seem 
also to have done. Croesius, however, in his 
Opvigog EQw/cc, vol. i. p. 145, cites Clemens Alex- 
andrinus, Strom, lib. i. as ascribing the poems of 
Orpheus to Onomacritus ; and, under these cir- 
cumstances, no stress can be laid on their autho- 
rity \ 

y Macrobius entitles the 18th chapter of his first book thus ; 
£ Libemm quoque patrem eum ipsum esse Deum quern Solem.' 

z Justin Martyr styles him the first teacher of Polytheism. 
Gale, Court of the Gentiles, part i. book iii. p. 5. 

a Court of the Gentiles, part i. book iii. p. 7. 

b Selden seems so persuaded they were not genuine, that, 
in his tract De Diis Syris, p. 55, he uses these words: ' Ono- 
* macriti hymnos (quorum autorem Orpheum credit imperitum 


' Linus, the reputed preceptor of Orpheus, 
which last person lived about 1255 years before 
our Saviour c ; Musseus, 1253 d ; Homer, 973°; 
and Hesiod, 909 f ; have all written in Hexameter 
Heroic verse, and in that alone, as it seems to have 
been the only kind then known ; and the earliest 
of them lived about 265 years subsequent to 
Moses -, by whom, in the opinion of Josephus 
and St. Jerom, that very kind of verse had before 
been employed 11 . 

As to Pentameter verse, which undoubtedly 
sprung from the Heroic Hexameter, Horace ' l has 
said it was uncertain by whom it was invented. 
The discovery of it has been attributed to Pytha- 

' vulgus) qui luculentissimum hujusce rei specimen praebenf-, 
* mitto.' 

c Saxii Onomasticon Literarium, p. 5. See also edit. 1775, 
vol. i. p. 7. 

d Saxius, p. 5.— Edit. 1775, vol. i. p. 8. 
e Saxius, vol. i. p. 11. — 882. Saxii Onomast. Lit. p. 5. 
f Saxius, vol. i. p. 12. — About 800. Helvici Chron. p. 5L 
s Moses is placed, by Saxius, between 1513 and 1459 years 
before our Saviour. Saxii Onomast. Lit. p. 5. In edit. 1775 7 
vol. i. p. 4, he is placed 1496 before our Saviour. 

h Josephus, Antiquities of the Jews, book vii. chap. 10= 
See ' S. Hieronymi in Librum Job Preefatio,' among the Pro- 
legomena to the Vulgate Latin Bible. 

1 * Versibus impariter junctis querimonia primum, 
1 Post etiam inclusa est voti sententia compos : 
' Quis tamen exiguos elegos emiserit auctor 
; Grammatici certant, et adhuc sub judice lis est.' 

Horatius De Arte Poetics 

E 2 


goras k , who lived 507 years before our Sa- 
viour \ to Mimnermus 1 ", who flourished between 
570 and 561 years before Christ", and to a poet 
named Ortugen ° 3 of whom nothing is known. 
But it is certainly true., that it was used by Archi- 
lochus; for AthenaeusP has given from him the 
two following lines, which are manifestly Hexa- 
meter and Pentameter ; and what is extraordinary 
is, th&t they are not of the Elegiac^ but of t he- 
Epigrammatic cast, 

' Ev hf\[JLev poi j ^oc^oc ys=\ixa,yiASv*/\.\ eu loft | 5' otvog^ 

k Plotius De Metris, inter Grammat. Lat. Auctores, a 
Putschio, col. 2635. 

1 Saxii Onomast. Lit. p. 7. See also edit. 1775, vol. i. 
p. 27. — 589 before our Saviour. Helvicus, p. 61. 

m Plotius, ubi supra. 

■ Saxii Onom. Lit. p. 6. In edit. 1775, vol. i. p. 20, he is 
placed between 592 and 590—637 before Christ. Helvici Chro- 
nologia, p. 59. 

■ Plotius, ubi supra. 

p Edit. Casauboni, fol. Lugd. 1621, p. 30, 

9 This line, which is certainly corrupt, is permitted by Ca- 
saubon to pass without notice ; and, indeed, he seems so well 
satisfied with its correctness, that he thus translates that and 
the preceding : 

£ Hasta raaza subacta mihi est, vinuraque paratum 
* Ismaricum ; hasta, nos riitimur et bibimus,' 

By this mode of rendering, equally weak and unfaithful, the 
point is in a great measure destroyed. The line is, however, 
certainly corrupt, but may be easity corrected by a very slight 
alteration, in this manner s 


In Stobeeus r , fo. 524, b. is also a poem by him, in 
Hexameter and Pentameter verse,, wbicb is of the 
Elegiac kind : it contains ten lines, and is addressed 
to Pericles. Archilochus flourished about the 
year 713 or 711 before our Saviour % and conse- 
quently 204 years before Pythagoras 1 , and 150 
before Mimnerams u . Hesiod, who lived 909 
years before our Saviour % and ail the Grecian 
poets before Hesiod, use only Hexameter verse v ; 
and, if Pentameter were not in reality invented by 
Arcbilochus, it must have been discovered between 

Ey dofi\fxiv [Acl\^<x pi p.t\iAX,<y[Atvov J ev cogi 9 j ^ojyoy 
Ic7|£«ffj%o$. vsi\vu J $'tv Sopl I y.txXi}Ai\v6s, 

And, thus corrected, the lines may be translated as follows ; 

* Kasta qui vici, vinum me perdit. et hasta 

' Ismaricuin. En hasta, victus et, ipse bibo.' 

Mafa is not, as Casaubon, by his translation, appears to have 
supposed, a noun substantive, but the third person singular of 
the present tense of the indicative mood of the contracted verb 
Mafaw, subigo ; and as there is consequently no possibility that 
^^ayuivrty the participle, could be intended to agree with it, it 
is manifestly clear, that the reading ^^cty^vr,, which also con- 
tradicts the sense, canno:. be justified. On the contrary, ^e^«- 
ypsvov, the accusative case of the Participle of the Preterperfect 
and Plusquam PerfcCtum tenses, from the verb Ma^o^a*, pugno > 
is in every way capable of defence. 

r Edit. Gesner, fo. Tiguri, 1543, 

8 Saxius, Onom. Lit. p. 6. See also edit. 1775, vol. i. p. 14, 

* See in a former note when he lived. 
u See in a former note when he lived. 

* Saxii Onom. Lit. vol. i. p. 12. — About 800 years before 
cur Saviour. Helvici Chron. p 5.1. 

* See the instances before mentioned, 

i 3 


the two periods when Hesiod and himself flou- 
rished, during which space, no one poet is men- 
tioned by Saxius. Hexameter and Pentameter 
verses are also to be seen intermixed in the poems 
of Tyrtaeus z , who flourished 682 years before 
our Saviour % and is styled by Saxius % ' Elegorum 
' Martiorum artifex.' Suidas calls him a writer of 
Elegies c , and says that he wrote precepts of life 
in Elegiac verses, and poems on War, in five 
books d . In the Poetae Minores Grseci, before re- 
ferred to, are inserted, p. 477, &c. four poems by 
him, entitled, at the head of the first, IIspi ttjs tto- 
Xs^mng czpsTTig. Mimnermus, who lived between 
592 and 590 years before our Saviour e , is styled 
by Saxius, the inventor of the Pentameter verse r . 
Suidas calls him, as he does Tyrtaeus, a writer of 
Elegies " ; but it is plain the Pentameter verse had 
before been used by Tyrtaeus, and before him by 
Archilochus. Four poems by Mimnermus, in Ilex- 

2 Some such occur in the Poetae Minores Greeci (before re- 
ferred to), p. 476, &c. 

a Saxii Onomast, Lit. p. 6. See also edit. 1775, vol. i. 
p. 15. 

b Saxii Onomast. Lit. vol. i. p. 15. 

c See the passage from Suidas, in the Poetae Minores Grseci, 
p. 477. 

d Ibid. 

e He is placed by Saxius, in his Onomasticon Lit. p. 6, be- 
tween the years 570 and 561 before our Saviour. But see 
him placed as in the text Saxii Onom. Lit. vol. i. p. 20. 

f See the passage from Suidas in the Poetae Minores Graeci, 
p. 507. 

s Saxii Onom. Lit. vol. i. p. 20. 


ameter and Pentameter verse, the first entitled 
Uspt j3iv oti @pc#x,vg ; the second, Yoyog yy^oog ; the 
third without any title ; and the fourth, U^i av- 
fyuotg; and two in Iambic, the first without a 
title, and the second, Eig imps* occur in p. 507, 
&c. of the before-mentioned collection. Among 
the Elegies of Solon, in the same work, p. 465, 
are several in Hexameter and Pentameter verse. 
Solon appears to have been contemporary with 
Mimnermus, and is placed by Saxius 592 years 
before our Saviour K 

h Saxii Oriomast. Lit. p. 6. See also edit. 1775, vol, i, 
p, 20. 

E 4 


Iambic the second Sort of Poetry. 

Archilochus the supposed inventor, or rather introducer, of 
Iambic verse into Greece. — All Lyric Poetry probably attri- 
butable to him. — The principles of all borrowed by him 
from the Psalms of David. — The very metres of all these 
sorts actually occur in the Psalms of David. — Specimens 
from Archilochus's writings, to ascertain what sorts of verse 
he employed. — Iambic Trimeter acatalectic, Iambic Tetra- 
meter cataiectic, Trochaic Tetrameter catalectic used by him. 
— Iambic Trimeter acatalectic, intermixed with Trochaic 
Tetrameter catalectic, appears used ; but probably it ought 
to be arranged as all Trimeters.- — Iambic and Trochaic verses 
may be intermixed. — He uses, on another occasion, Trochaic 
Trimeter acatalectic and Iambic Trimeter acatalectic to^e- 
ther. — He appears to have introduced, together with the 
Trochaic, the Iambic foot also in the same line. — Reason- 
able to do so. — He did not apply Iambic for invective, but, 
probably, only used it, because it was cheerful, and fit for 
lyric purposes. — Present etymology of the name Iambic 
not defensible.- — A new one proposed. 

Archilochus, who is placed by Saxius, about 
717 or 713 years before our Saviour 1 , is supposed 
to have invented, or, rather, to have first intro- 

1 Saxii Onom. Lit. p. 6; but Saxius, edit. 1775, vol. i. 
p. 44-, places him between 713 and 711 years before our Saviour. 
He there says, he lived to the 23d Olympiad ; but Helvicus, in 
his Chronologia, p. 55, places him 717 years before our Saviour, 


duced into Greece Iambic verse k . To him also 
it should seem that a similar introduction of all 

k * Archilochum prpprio rabies armavit Iambo.' 

Horatius De Arte Poetica, v. 79. 

Rufinus, in his book De Metris Comicis (see it in edit. Putsch* 
col. 2709) speaks of Boiscus as the inventor of Iambic Tetra» 
meter verse, as appears from the following passage in Vossii 
Institution. Poetic, lib. ii. p. 129, § 9: ' Utuntur Comici non 

* dimetro modo, et trimetro, sed et tetrametro ; quod repent 
i Boiscus. Unde apud Rufinum, libro De Metris Comicis i 

" Tetrametros sequitur, quos finxerat i.lle Boiscus.' 5 

* Subjicit deinde exemplum tale : 

" Mirabor hoc si sic abiret, et heri semper lenitas." 

Ter. Andr. Act i. Sc. 1 ■ 

* Aliquanto item post de eodem ait : 

" Tetrametrmn primus fertur posuisse Boiscus.'* 

{ Suspicetur aliquis pro Boiscus legendum Vopiscus ; ut intelli- 

' gatur Julius Caesar Vopiscus, qui tragcediae scriptor fuit, ac 

4 Strabo etiam et Sesquiculus dictus ; teste Mario Victorino 

* libro de Orthographia. (See Marius Victorinus, edit. Putsch. 
' col. 2456.) Verum obstat ; quod hie Boiscus, non Romanus, 
i Cyzicenus fuit, uti ostendit epigramma de eo, quod ex Hero- 
'» doto Rufinus adducit : 

'* Toy oxtcct&v ii)fu)v fix '* *&&$? ?'»%<rt ^wpov." 

" Boiscus iste Cyzicenus, scriptor omnis carminis, 
<c Versus pedum octo repperit, Phceboque dedicavit." 

* Prior versus est acatalectus, alter catalecticus ; quo et ipso 
i comici gaudent.' — Suidas, in his Lexicon, attributes to Ari- 
stophanes the invention of Tetrameter and Octameter verse 6 
' *Et/p£ mg tv TETpa/iirpy y.ui oarage rpa.' Suidas, art. Aristophanes. 
— Gesner, in his Bibliotheca, asserts the same fact, * Aristo- 

* phanes tetrametrum, et octametrurn invenit.' Gesner, Biblio* 
theca, edit, 1545. fo. 72, a. — ' Floruit circa Olympiadem 114.' 

8 Vtfl VKOi 


the other kinds of Lyric Poetry is equally attribut- 
able ; the original ideas for which, he no doubt 
acquired and borrowed from the Psalms of David, 
to whom, according to Saxius, he appears to have 
been about 292 years posterior l . In point of fact, 
it has been already shown, in Section II. that the 
very metres and feet, on which Iambic and the 
other sorts are founded, actually occur in the 
Psalms of David. 

As this author, Archilochus, seems to have 
been, in truth, the real founder of Lyric Poetry 
among the Greeks, it is evidently of importance 
to inquire what species of verse he employed ; 
and, in order to this, as the specimens of his 
writings given by Heraclides Ponticus, Plutarch, 
Stobseus, and others are few* and ill arranged, 
some passages being given in prose, which arc ac- 
tually verse, it is become necessary to insert the 
different fragments, arranging them in that mode 
of versification which it is evident they should 

The first sort, therefore, which he used, was 
Iambic Trimeter acatalectic, of which the follow- 
ing is a specimen, as it stands divided into lines, 
in the c Carmhmm Poetarum novem Lyricse 
1 Poesew-s principum Fragments/ 12mo. Apud 
Hieronimum Commelinum, cla lo xcnx (1598), 

1 David is placed by Saxius, Onom. Lit. p. 5, 1053 years 
before Christ, and so he stands in the edit, of 1775 3 vol. i. p. 9» 


p. 128. This example comes originally from Plu- 
tarch De Tranquillitate Animi: 

Ov ijloi | to. Yvy'c\hi ts I 7TGXv\x^vcrov I fJLSXzi 
OvF sifoJ ttoo | lls ^Vi\Kog sX' I <xy(Xi\ojjLOii 

hnro\jT^ r cv | yap sg\iv o<P\9m\[amv | s^co; 11 . 

Iambic Tetrameter catalectic, he seems also to 
have employed, as appears from this specimen, 
inserted in the same collection, p. 132, from 
Theon the sophist, in his Progymnasmata, Plu- 
tarch, and Diogenes Laertius. In the above col- 
lection it is thus divided into lines : 

c Tolog | yoio dv\9poo7rot\cri 9v\^.og 9 TKavlxjs h.z7i\iivzoc\i7ou 
c 0^To7g t \ okoi\yjv Zsvg | e<p 7 jj|jufg)?v | ayeu 

At present the last line is only an Iambic Trimeter 
acatalectic ; but, as the passage is merely a frag- 

m This must be scanned as a monosyllable, in order to make 
the verse Iambic 

n For the further assistance of the reader, the quantities 
of the words have been marked, and the verses divided into 
feet, which are not so in the original ; but the distribution and 
regulation of the verses have not been altered. This mode of 
marking the quantities and feet has been followed throughout, 
in the other Greek quotations, so far as it could be ascertained ; 
but where, as in some few instances, it could not be discovered 
what the metre was intended to be, the quantity of each syl- 
lable has only been marked, and the verses are left undivided 
into feet. 


ment, it is probable that the second line was, like 
the former, extended to a Tetrameter in the ori- 

The next sort was Trochaic Tetrameter cata- 
lectic, of which the following is a real specimen, 
though very improperly exhibited as prose, in the 
* Carminiim Poetarum novem Fragmenta' (before 
referred to), p. 128 : it is there said to have been 
taken from Heraclides Ponticus, but ought thus 
to be divided : 

Yhuvxe o\ga t (2o&\9vg yap | y^'/j | jct^u,a|<r/ n tm\qmq-(ts\tgii 

YLovTog> J oi^t J oaxpcK | yupsov J opirov | \gu\rou v£\pcg 9 

XyjAM j k£i[jlw\vos x^yjzvU J Vl^ ci\sh7iTi\v)g (po\(3og°. 

The two following specimens, which are also 
evidently of that very kind, when rightly ar- 
ranged, are in the same collection, p. 128, 129, very 
erroneously also represented as prose. The first 
comes from Plutarch ' De modo audiend. a juvene 
6 Poem. ;' the second, from Dio Chrysostom ; and 
the third, which is merely a different reading of 
the same passage, from Galen. 

n This should surely, on account of the metre, which is 
evident!}^ Trochaic Tetrameter cataiectic, be read, xvpoionv. 

° Suidas, in his Lexicon, art. AproQxvris, attributes to Ari- 
stophanes the invention of Tetrameter and Octameter verse. 
Gesner, in his Bibliotheca, edit. 154*5, fo» 72, a. asserts the 
same fact ; bat it is plain, from these instances from Archilo- 
chus, that it was used by him, long before the time of Aristo* 


Plutarch e De modo audiend. a juvene Poem/ 

KKv9i ci\i/oc^ v H\poags, j kcu ftoi \ cruju,/**|%0£ yov\vis^\m 

Dio Clirysostom. 

Ov (piKi\oo [j.s\yav g^r^yovy \ &ds J hcc7rs\7rK7jy^\vGy 9 

OvSs j (Bo£j)ij\%6t<ri | yaCpo*, j «S' b|^riji;|^/^|yoj/. 

AAA# | jlco/ a>y | £<%\£o£, | <%cr(pa|Aa^ /3--|&pc&V? j x«i 

w w v-> _ >J <J 


The same, from Galen » 

Ov (pi\s\oo ps\yav gpv\iyyov, j ih \ ^iwirtyXYiyptybv, 

'AAA' og | /jco/, cp»j|cr/ 5 [/.o&Kpog j eify j H#i tts^J %vy\ j jiu*f 


'FoiKag } | cJ(r(pafA£|^^ /Sf \£>vixoug ] 7roc*P | x^SY|^g- ttAs)^. 

In p. 130 of the same collection, is the following 
specimen, divided into lines, as here, which is, 

p Both sense and metre require here some alteration. Per- 
haps we should read, wo-ir*?. It may, however, be intended 
for noo-a-i, pedibus, or ttocto-zv, for nroortv, pedibus, poetice. See 
Schrevelii Lexicon, art. Uoara-tv. If we read wo-w.Ep, the sense 
will be, * treading firmly, like one of firm courage ;' or, if we 
read w«r<r», it will signify * treading firmly with his feet, full of 
6 courage/ 


as it stands, evidently Trochaic Tetrameter Gata- 
lectic, and is there said to be taken from Stobseus, 
in tract* De Spe ^. 

<=> V> — \J ~ , \J —V_* — W _ <U _ KJ \J 

c O'yJi I 6uvfui\(rioy' l|-7rfiS^ j Z^ug- woj|t^ o|Auju,7r/|«y 

* Ex, ju^lcn^?^]^ f'l&pcs | iwr', <x\7roK^v\^\oig <pd\cg 

c HA/|» Ags//.|7toj/to£. | Kvy^ov | S' ?A£' sV | uv9f>w\7nsg $s\og> 

( Kk Ss J t2 y^^Tr/^ | itocvtcc | x#j c7r/ [ cA7rr<% r \ yi- 
\j _ 

' Ey#A/]cv, 7tod\ o-tpi* 6cz\Xa,o-(ryig | ^^\svTCi \ KV^u\voi 
c $>iXtsp j Yj7isi\^ ys\vr}TUi, J Tot^ cr(p/ja-/ u 5?f|Ju55y o\pog* 

i Stobaei Sentential, edit. Gesner, fo. Tiguri, 1543, fo. 
496, b. 

r In the original it stands x*ff«Xirra, which was certain!} 7 
meant for xal sTrtfAsrra. 

s There is an Iambus here, unless, for the sake of the metre, 
we should read Ay^ac-iv. But still vpuv, in the same line, will 
remain an Iambus, and so will the second foot of the next line. 

1 £<p*, here, should be o-Qhtij which will make the foot a 
Tribrachys; or it may be <r$*y, which would convert it to a 

u The original here reads roicrt, c*\,h ; but, as the line would 
then be a syllable too short, the correction made in the text 
was rendered requisite. It is no objection that the last sixth 
foot is an Iambus, because similar instances have occurred be- 
fore in this example. If we read o-^tcrw, it will be right as a 


If the following lines, as thus given by Sto- 
bseus, in his tract c De non petulanter insultando 
' Mortuis V are to be relied on for division, or 
arrangement, it should seem that Afchilochus 
sometimes intermixed Iambic Trimeter acatalectic, 
with Trochaic Tetrameter catalectic. 

But it is also probable that the lines should be 
thus arranged, which would make them all Tri- 
meters ; in which case, the circumstance of one 
line being Iambic and the other Trochaic, could 
not be material, because there is every reason to 
think that, originally, they were considered, as 
they are in reality, as the very same species z . 

x Stobaeus, fo. 525, b. 

y ' Carminum Poetarum novem Fragmenta,' p. 131. This 
passage stands, in the place just referred to, as if it were 
only two lines, and taken from Stobaeus; but, on turning to 
this latter author, it appears that a line at the beginning, which 
he has given, has been in the transcription into this collection 
of the l Carminum Poetarum novem Fragmenta ' accidentally 
omitted. The line is this, 

Keva j 9ocvgv\to? avjdpoj aiJjc/^Yiji | cxtay. 

and it tends still further to confirm the idea of the propriety of 
the arrangement suggested in the text. 

2 So Euripides seems to have thought them ; for he appears 
to have used Iambic Trimeter and Trochaic Trimeter together, 
and to have also introduced an Iambic foot into the Trochaic 


ZwTag [ Y~oXd\(jiv % | 6ccvo>\Tcng £v\a-&Qeg. 
Ov yap J ecrBXa j Jco&T6'a\viSori j xsgro j fAs7y 
'E7T cZvfyc&riv I 

So, in another instance^ produced also by Stobceus. 
In the same tract % Arehilochus appears to have 
Used the two species of Trochaic Trimeter acata- 
lectic and Iambic Trimeter acatalectic together, 
or rather following each other, in succession. 

* Tc7g [jlsv | Ts9vs\w<rtv s\Asog z\ttl siKyjg | 9sog, 

* To7g £w\<ri }?STs\pov ewo\<riwWuToy 3 \ $Qbvog h ? 

In using the Trochaic Trimeter catalectic ? 
which, like the other sorts, he seems also to have 
employed, he appears to have introduced, together 
with the Trochaic, the Iambic foot also, which, for 
reasons already urged, and the circumstance that 

verse, all which may be seen in the following lines, inserted by 
Stobaeus, edit. i'o. 1543, fol. 526, b. 

Tvp£u) \ <y«p &\$ilc 7ri\ro$ avjQp'Trav j QiXoq 

For the first syllable in Gctvovrwv is certainly short, as appears 
from the following line, Homer, II. lib. x. v. 4?55, 

£ Au.T«g IJttea he Gajyw, >tTEpi[£(7< pi J $7ol 'aJ^omo/.' 

a Stobaeus, fo. 525, b. 

b w Carminum Poetarum novem Fragmenta,' p. 131. It 
may be seen, in a former note, that Euripides appears to have 
done the same, 


they are in their proportions evidently the same 
sort, he might, as has already been shown in 
Section III. very reasonably and properly do. The 
fact of his having acted thus, is evidenced by the 
following specimen, furnished by Clemens Alex- 
andrinus : 

ir fl Ziv> | coy [asv | xpoc\vs xgd\jog, (rv j Vipyoi 
c E7r' ccv\9pu)7T%$ I p^g Ks\wgyd ts \ kcu Q$z\pi<;(X, V 

This instance, together with those already noticed, 
and the reasonableness of the practice, as flowing 
from the principle so often necessarily insisted on, 
is surely sufficient evidence to prove the fact. 

Enough, however, appears from these speci- 
mens, to show that he did not employ the Iambic 
for the purposes of rage and invective, as Horace 
has erroneously said d ; for no one of the few in- 
stances in the c Carminum Poet arum novem Frag- 
* menta,' has any such tendency. The real fact 
seems to have been, that his Only inducement to 
the use of the Iambic, was the circumstance of his 
finding, as every one must, that that species of 
verse was abundantly fitter than Heroic Hexa- 
meter, the only sort before known, for cheerful 

c * Carminum Poetarum novem Fragments,' p. 132. See, in 
a former note, an instance, in which Euripides seems to have 
acted thus. 

d Archilochum proprio rabies armavit lambo. 

Horatius De Arte Poetica^ v. 79- 


and lively subjects, such as are treated of in Lyric 
Poetry. That this is the characteristic of Iambic 
verse, cannot be doubted ; and there is every rea- 
son to think, as will be seen from the following 
facts, that it obtained its name from that very 
circumstance ; that it acquired its appellation from 
its use ; and was denominated Iambic, either be- 
cause it was cheerful, and treated of or expressed 
exhilarating subjects ; or, more probably, because 
it was employed at times and on occasions of festi- 
vity and merriment. 

A very different etymology of its name, Iam- 
bic, and definition of its nature and proper use. 
have, it is true, been usually given ; for its name 
has been said to have been derived probably from 
lev fZmtstv, Jacula loqui e , and its proper use to 
have been invective and malediction f . Schreve- 
lius, in his Lexicon, derives ' I^/xS^, proscindo, 
c maledictis et convitiis insector,' from ( la^og pes 
e metricus, vel carmen »/ and makes it a question, 
whether this latter is not from lov fia^siv, Jacula 
loqui h . But this would not produce la^i^siv, even 
admitting the change of the Alpha into Iota in 
the last syllable. It would be lov&igiv ; or, if the 
plural of lov were to be taken, instead of the sin- 
gular, it must be IocSi^siv : nor is there any me- 

e Schrevelii Lexicon, art. Ia^Cos. 

f Schreveiius, art. lap&fy. Horace De Arte Foetica, 
v. 79. 

g Schrevelii Lexicon, art. I«jm£/£«. 
h Schrevelii Lexicon, art. I»/*£o£. 


thod by which the letter p could be introduced. 
No supposition can be more at variance with the 
nature and actual use of the Iambic, which is ad- 
mitted by Aristotle \ Horace k 3 and Terentianus 
JVfaurus 1 , to be well calculated for ordinary con- 
versation, and the transaction of business, than 
that which describes it as naturally adapted for 
censure^ invective, and reproach. 

In ascertaining the etymology of a word, it is 
not sufficient that the original should resemble, 
in sound or in the letters of which it is composed, 
that imagined to be derived from it. No etymo- 
logy can be justly considered as authentic or pro- 

1 Aristotle, De Poetica, cap. 4, says, * M«Xff« yap xtx.™}* 

i ?uv ju.5T|0)y to iocjJohov tf i. <rn[JLUov ds rovrov, sr^£*<ra ydo lccjjL(3s7<y, Xsyc 

* vovte? t%$ XsKTixr^ a^ov/aj.' — ' Omnium enim metrorum maxime 
' colloquio accommodatum est Iambieum. Hoc vero inde ma- 

* nifestum est, quod in mutuo sermone plurimis Iambis utimur, 

* Hexametris autem raro et a sermone communi aberrantes.'— 
Aristot. De Poetica, col. 7 and 59. 

k Horace, in his Art of Poetry, v. 81, speaking of Iambic, 
describes it as 

' Alternis aptum sermonibus, et populares 

' Vincentem strepitus, et natum rebus agendis. 9 

1 Terentianus Maurus, inter Grammat. Lat. Auctores, a 
Putschio, col. 2443, speaking of Iambic, says; 

* Sed qui pedestres fabulas socco premunt, 

* Ut quee loquuntur sumpta de vita putes. 

* Vitiant lambon,' &c. 

Again, a few lines below : 

* In metra peccant arte non inscitia, 

4 Ne sint sonora verba consuetudinis, 
' Paulumque rursus a solutis different.-' 

F Z 


bable, which does not carry with it some substan- 
tial reason why the derivative term should bear 
that appellation or signification, in preference to 
any other. It is the business of names to define 
and describe the nature and qualities of things, 
and to distinguish them from all others, to which 
they may happen to bear any real or apparent affi- 
nity or resemblance. The appellation should, 
therefore, point out the peculiar characteristic dis- 
tinction ; and this, in the case of Poetry, can only 
be done from considering its nature and use. 

The nature of Iambic, under which term, for the 
reason above mentioned, all kinds of Lyric Poetry 
were apparently at first comprehended, was evi- 
dently joyful, exulting, and merry. It therefore 
was applied to the purposes of joy and mirth ; 
and from that circumstance, as will be seen 
from the following facts, it in all likelihood ob- 
tained its name. I&psvog and fapo£, in Greek, 
which are both the same as Ewpi^, mean locus 
irriguus et herbosus m . Iuv9vf 9 the name of a wo- 
man, is derived from Icwoo, exhilaro n ; and Imvw is 
rendered, by Schrevelius, c Calefacio, Liquefacio, 
4 Perfundo lsetitia, Exhilaro, Floreo, item Ad iram 
i concito ° ;' and for these senses he cites Hesy- 
chius. la^va, (or lapvp) @a£siv, would, therefore, 
fairly imply c Florida loqui.' Ioum (So^siv would 
equally be ' L^eta loqui;' and the change from this 

m Schrevclii Lexicon, art. Ia/x&o;. h Ibid. art. hxvfa, 

° Ibid. art. !«»«. 


last to lujiSugeiV; easily corrupted to Iap&i£sw, may 
be justified by that of Ava&oiKhopou to A^S^AAo//^/, 
and Avot£utvsiv to Ap&aimv, mentioned by Schre- 
veliusP. But, perhaps, a still closer etymology 
may be formed from Aia, Inter, and Ajj£i% 9 Olla, 
Calix c i ; the first letter of the preposition, Aia, 
might possibly be omitted, in consequence of a 
degree of corruption not so great, as has actually 
occurred in other instances ; and the whole to- 
gether would then produce this sense, c Inter 
' calices,' which might properly refer to composi- 
tions recited or sung at feasts and merry-makings., 
(luring which, none but such subjects as tended 
to the excitement of festivity would of course be 

» Schrevelii Lexicon, art. ApCqtto/Mu, and art. ApGouwv. 
<* Ibid. art. Au&f. 

* 3 



Pceonic the third Sort of Poetry, 

Archilochus appears to have used Bacchiac or Paeonic. — -A 
specimen from him, as given by Hephaestion. — This speci- 
men erroneously supposed by Hephaestion a compound of 
two sorts of metre.-— A specimen of Paeonic by Cratinus, as 
given by Hephaestion. — A similar error of Hephaestion's, as 
to this also. — The scanning of all these rectified, which shows 
them to be Paeonic. — x\nother specimen of Bacchiac from 
Archilochus, as given by Stobseus. — This better regulated. — 
Another specimen of his from Stobaeus. — The same better re- 
gulated. — Another from Stobaeus. — A better regulation.— 
Another regulation, by which the lines may be made Trochaic 
Dimeter.— Part of a Dithyrambic hymn by him. — These lines 
Bacchiac. — The Bacchius foot so named, because used in 
hymns to Bacchus. — Choriambic called Bacchiac. — Cho- 
riambic used by Cratinus and Phrynichius. — Bacchiac, Cre- 
tic, and Paeonic, all one sort. — Erroneously considered by 
Bentley as separate kinds. — Hexameter originally the only 
kind of verse — Consequently, no appropriation of metre to 
particular subjects at that time. — Hymns to Bacchus ori- 
ginally in that metre. — Iambic introduced by Archilochus, 
as better suiting Lyric subjects. — Paeonic he applied to the 
rites of Bacchus, probably finding the succession of syl- 
lables better calculated for that sort. — Bacchius, the foot so 
named from Bacchus, as before noticed. — Hymns to Bac- 
chus denominated Dithyrambic. — Etymology of the term. — « 
Satiric Poetry probably Bacchiac or Paeonic.-— Aristotle's 
opinion that the Dithyramb was the origin of Tragedy. — His 
idea as to the change of metre.— A shameful interpolation 


by Bishop Hare, in the passage from Aristotle. — The Te- 
trameter verse, mentioned by Aristotle, erroneously sup- 
posed Trochaic. 

From the specimens of Archilochus's compositions 
among the ' Carminum Poetarum novem Frag- 
6 menta,' it should appear that he certainly used 
the Bacchiac or Paeonic, and probably was the 
first person who introduced that, as well as the 
Iambic, into Greece. In the above-mentioned 
collection, p. 131, the following specimen of a 
poem of Archilochus is given, as preserved by 
Hephsestion : this latter author, indeed, not know- 
ing what they really were, has, in his Enchiridion, 
edit. Pauw, p. 50, placed them under the head of 
ao-wapr/jTct, as he calls them, or verses composed 
of two sorts of metre confounded together in 
the same verse ; and consequently he scans them 
thus : 

V W — WW m. W W — «. _ W _ W _ W 

* Eptw J ttoKu (pih\rcc^ st€zi\doov, | Tio^-\cci VdhdtiSv 

* fyiXsnv I gvyvov | 7rsp £qv\toi, | py^s \ licc\z\yz<r$cii? 

remarking, at the same time, that the following 
line of Cratinus is of the same kind : 

V « \J \J mm U — W _ \J mm \J — W 

* Epao-|ju.oj'/^ j /3«(7i7r|7T5, j tcov oc\wgo\Xsiwv r .* 

r Plotius, edit. Putsch, col. 2661, gives as Paeonic, the two 

following lines from Cratinus : 

f 4 


But the fact is, they are all three Bacchiac or 
Paeonic, and to be scanned by metres of five and 
six short syllables in value, thus : 

Ep£W 7T0Xv I (pthT&ffl \zal\gOQV, TSp*<l>c\a<l V CLTuLoQUy 

t&ihssiv $vy\vov 7Tfp lov\ioc 9 uvj^s h ] aXsyecrB&t. 

Of the same kind, namely, Bacchiac or Paeonic, 
are evidently the following verses of Archilochus, 
preserved by Stobaeus, in his tract c De Vituperio 
' Veneris s ,' where, however, they are erroneously 
divided thus, as they also stand in the 6 Carminum 
6 Poetarum novem Fragmenta,' p. 129 : 

6 Tolog yap (piXoTr t rog sooog vtto nocaVtriV IXvcrBilg 

' HoKfcyjl? KCiT CtyJh'/lVC{JL[LUTWV 6%SVSj 

_ <_> _ „ <~» _ w v _ */<j 

"' "Kfe'^oig $x grfiiccv ccTT&Xocg Qpivag 

c Avgrjvog syKStpai 7tg8oc ayvxpg, x<zXc%Yj<n 

The following, of which the above verses are 
equally capable, seems a far more rational ar- 
rangement, from which also they will appear to be 
what they really are, Paeonic or Bacchiac : 

* Stobaeus, fo. 374-, b. 


_. 1/ 

Tchg yocp \ tpiAoT'/jTog e\pug vtto ;c#pjX*V 
it _ _ _ _ o — — _ \j w 

'EAx/o-St/V | TroAAvjv kolt \ ccyftyjv oplpoiTW 

E%svs 9 xKs^\ccg Ix. gr}\9sc*jy ct7iu\\otg (ppsvag 

_ _ VJ _ _ _ w — is — w is _ ir 

AuV>W I '(yvM^ca | 7ro#w a$>v%og, \ xa,7\S7tn<ri. 

Qswv olv\vYi<riv 67CY}\ti 7i'£7roip^s\vog S/ ogioov. 

Among the poems of Archilochus, in the ' Car- 
* minum Poetarum novem Fragmenta,' p. 129, is 
ene taken from Stobeeus c De Ira V and arranged 
as follows : 

' Qvus Qvll dutfyjiyQio'i x$s<ri xvxw^svs, 
( EvocSev, ^vcllsvmv S' ccKe^sv 7rgO(rl3czXcAjv 

\j _ v>_ — is _ is — — — — »sis 

* Evcjjto;' gspvov, h ^oxoig zyfipwv Trfyariov, 

IS _ w — _ IS IS .. 

c KccTc&goiQcig u<r(p(xKea)g' 


* K#2 joufre v/K-wv d^.(poc^vjv dyaXXso u 

* M^Si viK'/}9sig, h clxoo 7to6Tows<rwv o^vpso 

_ -j _ _ vs 1/ _ IS _ IS — IS 

c AAAa yficpTolcl ts %aips 9 xou xuxouriv 

_ _ is _ _— _ _ is _ (J 

* Aa-yjzKks p.vj Xiyjv' ylyvootnu §' o2?£ 
' Pucr^ccg- dv8gw7risg £%st. 


* Stobaeus, fo. 156. 

u Kirchner, in his Prosodia, p. 24, art. A/*$aSi»v, gives this 
line, and says it is Iambic ; but the whole here is evidently so ill 
regulated, as to make it doubtful whether this verse is correctly 
arranged, * 


The distribution is evidently wrong, as producing 
such an unaccountable variety of length in the 
verses, but the following reduces them all to an 
equal length, and is therefore justly entitled to 
the preference. Under this last distribution, they 
will be found to be what they really are, Paeonic or 
BacchiaCe Thus they should stand : 

W> — "_* V 


V <= » 

Evaniov J gipvov, h \ ^oxoig s%\8pwv TrAya-iov, 

<U> «s V/ m _ ij V _ _ <_ U _ _ 

*Ev 01X00 j XW?M7T£€rCvV j oJu^O #A|A#%#pT0/CT7 

Tf %oa^, xal j xwxoiviv OL<y\yjxXhz jjlt] | X/JJV 

The following verses of Archilochus are pre- 
served by Stobaeus, in his tract c De instabilitate 
' felicitatis humanse ?/ and thence inserted into 

x Henry Stephens, the editor of the * Carminum Poetarum 
' novem Lyricae Poese^s principum Fragmenta,' apud Comme- 
lirmm, 1598, considers this line as defective, wanting a word at 
the beginning, and marks it with an asterisk accordingly ; but 
there seems no real ground to suppose so. The first word is 
probably corrupt, and should be E.ctyy, the Middle Voice, Im- 
perative Mood, and Present Tense, from Ewyw, Induco, Excito, 
and signifies, Rouse thyself. 

y Stobaeus, fo. 484, b. 


the ' Carminum Poetarum novem Fragmenta/ 
p. 130, where they stand thus : 

' Toig 6eo7g | TiQci 7Tgcv\tcc } 7rcXXccKig I jJLSV ix xaxoov 

6 "Ai/S^s" o^|fe«rx, jut5Aoj/|vj? v^i^ii\visg stti yjtovi 

c HgKXcixig | S' av#7p£7r»[<r/, tow ju.«A' £U ] ficftqxoTCig 

^Yirtixg \ %mg ^Hcira, 7roK\Xoc yhsrou \ xtxxd 
c K#2 /3«* [ %py{wv 7rXavoc\Toa 3 xou vo\% Trezgyogog.* 

These lines seem Pseonic or Bacchiac, but, as re- 
gulated above, cannot, as is evident from the 
division into feet, be scanned as such, with- 
out a licence, in making the syllable m, in Iwt in 
the second line, short, which is there naturally 
long by position, as being followed by a word be- 
ginning with two consonants z . The difficulty 
may, however, be gotten over by reading sv 3 in- 
stead of £7r/, as sv 3 with a dative case, signifies su- 
per, the very sense required. See Schrevelii Lex- 
icon, the Latin part, art. Super. The last line, 
also, as it stands above, is too long, by a syllable 5 
and probably should be thus regulated, the last 
word being transferred to a fresh line, thus : 

UoifWjogGg j 

z See the Westminster Greek Grammar, p. 154, edit. 12mp- 
Loiid. 1779. 


Or the whole might be new arranged, thus : 

Tag 9soig | t(9ii 7Tocv\toc 9 7roKKccKig j u.h £K nomuiv 
'Avfyctg og\8a<ri, ^zKal\vv\ 7isi^(\vag 

•K«i ^ccTC ev | (SsfivjKOTctg j vinfeg | Kivxg 
Etts/t^ ttoAJAcs ylvSTMl j J6#?ta fcC^ /3/ 8 

It is, however, not to be concealed, that the 
whole might also be given as Trochaic Dimeter 
catalectic, in the following manner; but that 
would be a greater departure from the mode in 
which they stand at present : 

_ V — W _ _ \J 

Toig 6s\o7g tI\9si 7rcsi>[TftJ, 
TloKkoc\>tig jjlsv | sk vjz\kw 

"YmVisg Ki\vxg s\7rsnos> 
XToAAa j yhs\TOii Koi^ad 

K#2 Vo[tf 7T#|pl}o|fO£ , « 


It should seem also, that Archilochus was 
occasionally a writer of Dithyrambic poems. Athe- 
nseus, edit. Casaubon, p. 628, has given from Ar- 
chilochus, but erroneously, as prose, what will be 
found, on examination, to be clearly two Bacchiac 
or Pseonic verses ; for the lines are these, and, 
when properly regulated, are thus to be scanned : 

* Aisvv<roi\o a ocvocynoq J tlocTwv c^ccp^\si pshcg 

_ W W — — «*l __ U ■ ■ w — — — \J w 

c OTXas h9v\pcd.jjL^ov, oi\vu <rvyK$pccv\vw9sig (ppsvc&£.* 

The Bacchiac foot is said, by Victorinus, to have 
been so called, because it was used by the Bac- 
chants in hymns to Bacchus b ; and he also says, 
that the Bacchius and the Choriambus are proper 
feet for the hymns to Bacchus e . To this he adds. 

* Bacchus is frequently termed Dionysius, which probably 
is derived from A»a, Propter, Omo$, Vinum, and Avuw, Irnpleo ; 
and means ' Propter vini impletionem. 1 See Schrevelii Lexicon, 
in those several words. 

b * Cum vero longis duabus prseponitur brevis, fit Bacchius. 
' temporum quinque, ut Catones, quia a Bacchi carminibu* 

* seu cantilenis, quse aptissime hoc metro componuntur, nomen 

* accepit, vel quia familiariter hie Rhythm us Bacchantibus ap^ 

* tus sit.' Victorinus, edit. Putsch, col. 2488. — Plotius, edit. 
Putsch, col. 2625, says, * Bacchius dictus est, quod Baccho, 

* id est Libcro Patri, accepta modulatio hujus pedis sono com- 

* ponebatur.' — Diomedes, edit. Putsch, col. 475, says, « Bac- 

* chius, QEnotrius, Tripodius, Saltans, quern Gr&ci Pariam- 

* bum dicunt, constat ex brevi et duabus longis, temporum 

* quinque, ut Agener, Athenaer; dictus rapa raj Bax^ctj, quia 

* Bacchantibus convenienter eomponebatur.* 

c Victorinus, edit. Putsch, col. 2532, speaking of the Cho- 
riambic, says, * Quod genus, si Hexametrum sit, Phrynichiuin* 


in another place, that Choriambic was, by Musi- 
cians, called Bacchiac d ; and mentions Cratinus, 
who is known to have been a comic writer, and 
Phrynichius, both a tragic and comic author, as 
having used it e , Cratinus lived 453 years before 
Christ f ; Phrynichius, 434". In confirmation of 
this last assertion, so far as regards the instance 
of Cratinus., it is to be observed, that Plotius h has 
given from that author the two following lines as 
examples of the Peeonic. It is true, that, as it 
often happens in such cases, they are there exhi- 
bited as prose ; but it is evident they ought to be 

s de authore Tragcediographi nomine nuncupabitur, aptum ca- 
$ nendis laudibus Cereris et Liberi.' 

d ' Instruendi sane sum us nonnunquam Choriambo, si res 

* exegerit, Iambicam Basin immisceri, quod genus Bacchiacum 

* Musici dicunt/ Victorinus, edit. Putsch, col. 2583 And 

again, col. 2597, the same author, speaking of a line, which he 
there gives, says, * Quod est metrum, ut Grammatici Chori- 

* ambicum, ut Musici Bacchiacum sive Anacreontium, sylla~ 
6 barum octo.' — Fortunatianus, edit. Putsch, col. 2674, speaking 
of a verse, says, * Detracto enim Camcence, fit Anacreontium 

* metrum, syllabarUm octo, quod Musici Bacchion vocant, 
s Grammatici Choriambon, qui duplex constat ex longa et du- 

* abus brevibus et longa, id est, ex Chorea et Iambo.'— For- 
tunatianus, edit. Putsch, col. 2678, speaks thus: « Phalsecius 

* versus ex duplici pede constat, quern Bacchion Musici, Cho- 
{ riambicon Grammatici vocant : habet longam et duas breves 
5 et longam, i. Trochseum et Iambum. Hoc au'tem Phalaecus 

* conscripsit hymnos Cereri et Libero tali genere metri quod 

* scilicet est ....... « deorum convenire venerationi credidit,* 

e Victorinus, edit. Putsch, col. 2532. 
f Saxii Onomast. edit. 1775, vol. i. p. So. 
* Saxii Onomast. edit. 1775, vol. i. p. 43, 
h Edit. Putsch, col, 2661. 


thus regulated and scanned ; and so, indeed, on 
since turning to the Enchiridion of Hephaestion, 
edit. Pauw, p. 42, they are there found. 

1 A'fX&f a I 7r^iv sKdety \ 'i<rBi <fcz<ps'g j «AA' vircag* 

Plotius notices them, as evidence that this metre, 
the Paeonic, receives C re tics or Amphimacers in- 
termixed with itself ' ; after mentioning, however, 
that many persons had distinguished that species, 
the Paeonic, by the name of the Cretic. Some of 
the grammarians, and Bentley k among the rest. 
have considered Cretic, Bacchiac, and Pseonic, as 
three different sorts ; but there cannot be a plainer 
proof, than the last of the two lines above affords, 
that they are all three the same ; for, in that very 
line, all the three feet, the Cretic, the Bacchius, 
and the first Paeon, actually occur. 

Till the invention of Pentameter or Elegiac, 
Iambic, and Paeonic verse, all of which seem attri- 

* * Paeonicurn nietrum multi Creticum nuneupaverunt, quo- 

* niam una longa Cretici, id est Araphimacri soluta constat, 
1 Undo Cratinus dicens, " w Ey«ips ju£*gt» xpwxo* pfoi&sf* intulit 

* metrum Paeonicurn, " x ^^ ^ i^Scra, ^povta ^ m,&s 9 o/x«^- A*^Bs^ 
" a TTfiy i\9m 3 >cr§i ■ a-uQes uXa c7rwj. ,f Hoc, ergo, metrum, id est^ 
S Peeonicum, habet secum mixtos Creticos, id est, Amphima- 

* cros.'— Plotius, edit. Putsch, col. 2661. 

k In his * Emendationes ad Ciceronis Tusculanas/ inserted 
at the end of ' Ciceronis Tusculanarum Disputationum Libri v. 
4 ex recensione Joannis Davisii, Col. Regin. Cantab. Sociu' 8vo% 
Cantab. 1709, p. 49, 



billable to Archilochus, but one species of verse, 
the Hexameter, was known. There could, conse- 
quently, be no appropriation of metre to any par- 
ticular subject ; and the hymns to Bacchus, from 
the time of the introduction of his rites by Or- 
pheus \ who lived 1255 years before our Saviour m , 
were, therefore, most certainly in Hexameter 
verse. The inconvenience of this, probably in- 
duced Archilochus to think of a change, and to 
assign, as he appears to have done, Iambic to 
cheerful and exhilarating subjects, and PaeoniCj 
to the celebration of the rites of Bacchus n ; be- 

1 See a passage from Sandford De Descensu, 1. i. § 2, 
given in Gales Court of the Gentiles, part i. book iii. p. 5. Dio- 
dorus Siculus seems to have been Sandford's authority, but Jus- 
tin Martyr styles Orpheus the first teacher of Polytheism. Gale, 
as above referred to. 

m Saxii Onomast. Lit. edit. 1775, vol. i. p. 7. 

n That Paean was one of the names of Apollo, and that 
hymns in his praise were also so called, is a fact well known ; 
but it appears that originally Bacchus and Apollo were in effect 
the same deity, each of them being only supposed to be the 
Sun. Hoffman, in his Lexicon, art. Paeon, says, ' Paeon me- 

* dicus peritissimus, quem Homerus, lib. v. II. scribit curasse 

* Plutonem, graviter ab Hercule vulneratum ; aliqui ipsum hoc 
' nomine Apollinem intellectual volunt. Nic. Lloyd.'— Moreri, 
in his Dictionary, also says, * Mais Eustathius, et les autres qui 

* nous ont laisse des Commentaires sur THomere, assurent que 

* ce nom a ete donne a Apollon, et que, dans la signification du 

* Grec, il signifie guerir.'-— Macrobius, in the title to his seven- 
teenth chapter of his first book, says, < Omnes deos referri ad 
« Solem. Et quod ex variis Apollinis ostendatur nominibus, 
1 ipsum euudem esse deum, quem Solem dicimus.' His eighteenth 
chapter of the same book, he entitles thus : * Liberum quoque 

* Patrem cum ipsum esse Deum quem Solem.' 


cause he probably found that the order of succes- 
sion of the long* and short quantities, of which the 
feet of this last were composed, better suited that 
of the syllables of the very words, which it was 
necessary to introduce in the hymns to this deity . 
Whatever might be the reason, it is a decided and 
acknowledged fact, that the Bacchiac foot, which, 
before that time, had probably not acquired a pe- 
culiar name, had then first its appellation, because 
it is frequently found in the verses in honour of 
Bacchus, and was employed by the Bacchants 
and Satyrs, his supposed attendants p. 

° The fact of the application of Choriambic verse, which is 
there, however, called Bacchiac, to the rites of Bacchus, is thus 
evidenced, in the following passage from Fortunatianus, edit. 
Putsch, col. 2678 : * Phalsecius versus ex duplici pede constat, 

* quern Bacchion Musici, Choriambon Grammatici vocant : 

* habet longam et duas breves et longam, i. Trochaeum et Iam- 
i bum. Hoc autem Phalaecus conscripsit hymnosCereri et Libero, 

'tali genere metri, quod scilicet est deorum convenire 

i venerationi credidit.' The confusion between Choriambic and 
Bacchiac, probably arose from the circumstance that both the 
Bacchius and Choriambus occur in Paeonic verse, by which 
name, perhaps, this should have been more correctly described. 

* Bacchius dictus est, quod Bacchicis canticis congruat.' Aris- 
tides Quintilianus, edit. Meibomii, vol. ii. p. 38. — ' Bacchius, 
' CEnotrius, Tripodius, Saltans, quam Graeci Pariambum dicunt, 
' constat ex brevi et duabus longis, temporum quinque, ut 

* Agenor, A then* ; dictus 9r«p« 7ct$ Ba^ar, quia a Bacchantibus 
i convenienter componebatur/ Diomedes, inter Grammatical 
Latins Auctores, a Putschi®, col. 475.— i Cum vero longis dua- 
' bus prseponitur brevis, fit Bacchius, temporum quinque, ut 
' Catones ; quia a Bacchi carminibus, seu cantilenis, quae aptis- 



The hymns to Bacchus were denominated 
Dithyrambic., because, as some say, they were 
first composed by a poet of Thebes, of the name of 
Dithyrambits n * ; but it seems more probable that 

* sime hoc metro componerentur, nomen accepit, vel quia fami- 

* liariter hie Rhythmus Bacchantibus aptus sit.' Victorinus, 
ibid. col. 24-87* — { Bacchius dictus, quod Baccho, id est, Li- 
' bero Patri accepta modulatio hujus pedis sono componebatur.' 
PJotius, ibid. coi. 2626. — e Satyri, quia putabantur cum contis 
' et thyrsis in Liberi patris exercitu proslia iniisse, ejus generis 

* venabula gerebant.' Scaliger, Poeti.ces liber, lib. i. c. 17. — 
Natalis Comes, in his Mythologia, p. 481, edit. Genevse, 1620, 
says, speaking <)f Bacchus, * Hujus Dei Satyrbs, et Silenos, et 
' Lenas, et Nymphas, et Naiades, et Tityros sacerdotes fuisse 
4 inquit Strabo, libro decimo.' 

i < Dithyrambus, vir Thebanus a quo creditur genus illud 
4 versuum fuisse cognominatum in honorem Bacchi facti. , Horat. 
libro quarto Carm. Stephani Diet. art. Dithyrambus, p. 188, b. 
The Parian Chronicle attributes the introduction of these rites 
apparently to Hyagnis, a Phrygian; for it says, 1. 17, * Atf 5 
Eptx^ovio; TlavaQwctiois rots irymois yivopivoiq a^fxec e£tv%e, xal tov 
kywvoc IdiWiVi, ^s ASflva/f, [j.iTuvopce.<r£ 9 xui &,ya.Xy.a, tuv biuv yx^rpoj 
l<pdvn iy KujSs'Aotj, xecl 'Yccyvis b <I>p| eLvXes Kfuro; rjOpsv ly KiXecUccic rv)<; 
&fvy!ctc 9 xxi T7iv a[[AOVtav rv)v jtaAy/xaV^v $pt"yiy-' *rpwroc wXjiffs, jcai ccXXxs 
v6y.ii; M^Tpoj, A/ovfVaj riayof, xcci tuiy fVip/wp/wv Gswy, kui yfuvv, srn 
XHHAAAATI, Bmo-iXwovtos AQnvuiv Epsp^Oov/a ts to dfaa, ^'favToj.' — 
A quo Erichthonius Panathenseis primo celebratis currum 
junxit, et certamen edidit, et'Athenienses eo nomine appella- 
vit, et simulacrum matris Deorum apparuit in Cybelis montibus, 
et Hyagnis Phryx tibias primus invenit in Celaenis urbe Phry- 
gian et harmoniam dictam juxta Phrygium modum primus 
tibiis ", el alios nomos magnse Matris, Dionysi, Panis, 
et ilium deorum patriorum et heroum, anni mccxlii reg« 
nante Atheriis Erichthonio, qui currum junxit.' Prideaux, 
Marmora Oxon<, edit. 1676, p. 162. Gale, in his Court of the 
Gentiles, part ii. book in, p. 5, refers to Sandford de Descensu, 
1, i. sect, 22, as asserting, apparently on the authority of Die- 


they were so called from Aim, Inter ; Qvcc, Sacrifi- 
cimn ; and Aju.6/£, Olla, Galix; which, all taken 
together, would produce a sense like this : c Inter 
c sacras calices ;' because they were used in sacri- 
fices. Qvpoa-Kcc, Aruspex 3 derived, as it is in part, 
from Qucc, Sacrificium^ will very fully justify the 
introduction of the letter p, the only objection to 
which the above etymology might seem liable ; for 
the several words, taken together, certainly pro- 
duce a very complete sense, and perfectly consist- 
ent with the use which was made of this kind of 

Circumstances like these surely render it highly 
probable that Satyric Poetry, not, as the term is 
now understood, as referring to censure, but that 
species of which Aristotle s speaks, so called, as 
being derived from the Satyrs and Fauns \ the 

dorus Siculus, that Orpheus was the first who introduced the 
rites of Bacchus into Greece ; but the Parian Chronicle, in the 
passage above, mentions their introduction by Hyagnis, 124*2 
years before the writing of that Chronicle, and does not notice 

r Schrevelii Lexicon, art. 0upo<rxo?« 

s See the words of the passage in a subsequent note. 

1 Victorinus, edit. Putsch, col. 2527, describes Satyric 
Poetry, in the following words: * Superest Satyricum, quod 

* inter Tragicum et Comicum stylum medium est. Haec, apud 

* Grsecos, metri species frequens est, sub hac conditionis lege, 
' ut non Heroas, aut Reges^ sed Saiyros inducat, ludendi, 
' jocandique causa, quo spectatoris animus, inter tristes res Tra- 

* gicas, Satyrorum jocis et lusibus relaxetur.' It is evident from 
this, that such compositions were intended as interludes be- 
tween the acts of a tragedy, &c. 


companions and associates of Bacchus, was also 
Paeonic or Bacchiac, which is in fact the same. 
According to Aristotle, the Dithyramb was the 
origin of Tragedy u ; and he says, that the metre of 
Tragedy was afterwards changed from Tetrameter^ 
as it was at first, to Iambic ; for that, at first, Te- 
trameter was used, because Poetry was Satyric^ 
and fitter for dancing x . Of what species this Te- 
trameter was, has been a matter of doubt ; and 

u Aristotle, De Poetica, cap. 4, speaking of Tragedy, says* 

* K»i r, [x,sv cZko twv I|«p^ovtwv rov ^0u'pa^/3ov.' — ' Altera quideni 

* ducta origine ab illis, qui Dithyrambum instituerunt.' — Arist. 
De Poetica, Svo. Oxon. 1760, p. 6 & 58. 

x ''Et; de fxiyi^oc ex jutix.pwv [jlvQwv x.a.1 Ae|ewj yiKolooc,^ hoc to Ik 

* cxrvpixov [xztccvuXuv, o\]/t a-Trsc-s^vu^* to, te psTpov e'jc TETpa/xe'Tpou 
4 l<X[j,£ftov iyivtTo. to jusy yap TrpwToy tet^o^e't^w i^wvro^ &a to c-a-Tupi- 
i -/.m x.oci o'p^^rt^wTEpa.v Eivat irn/ Troi'ncnv. — * Porro autem magnitudo a 
' vilibus fabulis et dictione ridicula sero fiebat illustrior, eo quod 

* immutatio facta fuit a Satyrica Poesi : metrum etiam ex Te- 

* trametro redditum erat Iambicum, primo enim utebantur Te« 
< trametro, nempe quod Poesis erat Satyrica et saltui aptior.' 
Aristot. De Poetica, 8vo. Oxon. J 760, p. 7 & 58.— Bishop 
Hare has extracted this passage into his prefatory tract De 
Metris, prefixed to his edition of Terence, p. xxxviii. where he 
says, ' Primum enim clarissimo ex Aristotelis libro De Poetica, 
' testimonio constat Trochaicum genus fuisse antiquissimuniv 
' Haec enim ille, C. 4, " To, te pirpv U TiT^afj^TfH (i-po^ajxy) ioc(j.£uo.; 
" sysvtTo. to i*h yag TTpwrov TETp^gTpa', sp^aJvro, oiu, to ccctv^xyiv xal 
iC of^r,Tiy-^Tifdv 'avpa Tr\v Troi'vcnv, Xe|e«$ ds yivoy.ivr,<;, clvty) ft Qvtng to 
" o'lx.i'iov [jJ.rpov kv^z. jjLOsXira, yctp Xiktixov tvv [astouv to ia.[*£s76v eV**" — 

The word rpo^aixa, which alone here determines the sense of 
the passage, is an unwarranted interpolation, and does not 
occur in the original text of Aristotle. Though it is here placed 
in a parenthesis, the reason for which does not at first appear, 
yet, being written in Greek characters, like the rest, it is calcu^ 
lated to deceive and mislead, as it has done, 


some persons have unsuccessfully endeavoured, 
from a passage in Aristotle's treatise on Rhetoric, 
to show that it was Trochaic >'. But such is the 

y Mr. Tyrwhitt, in his edition of Aristotle 'De Poetica, 
edit. Oxon. 1794, p. 135, gives the following note on the pas- 
sage just inserted from Aristotle, referring to the words ' To ply 

* yap wpwrov TSTpa.ju.£T£w l^pSvTo.' — ' Sive in Choricis ipsis, puta, 

* sive etiam in Monodiis, in quibus histrionem ilium singularem 

* saltatione nonnunquam usum fuisse ; vero non est absimile. 

* Saltationi autem convenire metrum Trochaicum alibi observa- 
1 vit Noster Rhet. lib. iii. c. 8, * c 6 11 Tpo^aTo,- xo^«y.wwTEpoff* &»Xor 

{i os roc TtrpccjxiTga,' iri yap Tpo^?poj puS'u.oc rd TETpa^ETpa. Specimen 

* insigne est saltationis choricse, metris Trochaicis peractae 

* ap. Aristoph. E*p. v. 330 — 335/ But the whole passage 
here intended to be referred to, is the following, which oc- 
curs Aristotelis De Rhetorice, a Goulston, 4to. Lond. 1696, 
p. 195, * Aio pvQ[*ov ^r Ep^Eiv tov Xoyov, y.krpov $1 fj-vl' irolri^oc yocp i~ai' 

pvQ[A0V d) |/.TJ <XX.pi£uiS' TaTO cTe ETCCt, ECCV ^X^ Tif 73, ^ UV ° i pw8/*WVj [jAVf 

ypu'-S, <Ttfj<,vo<; Xyixtmo;, x.a\ d^onac, ^eo'^evoj. O d£ i'a^xGoj, aim 
£T*v Yi X=|i? n rw iroWuiv' $10 uaXiroc Trocvrasv twv psTgxv iay£iict, 
tyQtyywrat 7^yovrsc' d\? ce crs^'jor-nroc yivieVai ymi ixrno-ai. O de 
Toa^aiog, Ko^uxiKWTiPos* SnXoi Se ra nrpoc[xtr^a* Eft y«£ rpo^fpof 
fvQfjLo$ roc TET£«|U£Tpa. AuTTEroci ds TTaiav, w E^pwvro ju.e v v aTro ®pa<7U- 
fjcd^ov d^afxivoi' &■/. t?x ov ^ X£y £tvr > t/j *?v. "Er* ^e rpiro$ 7ra»«v, xa< 
e^o^/svoj twv upvtfxsvuv' rpiot yap 7Tpog dwo Er*v" eVe/v&v d£, [Asv ev 7i"poj 

" . « V V* ' » «' . " V .. / ' t r / t X\\ J7 » 

£V OS, ODO 7TP0? £V E^ETa/ OS TOJV AO<yO)V T«7a'V VIUCkQAlO$ &TQ<; di. S^IV 

Tratay. Oi /xev ovv aXXoi dia te ra uprifxsvcc, a^ersot, jcai o*ot/ jxirpiKOi' 
o os KaiaV) Xr^Treo^' cc&o [xovov yap hk et* jj,stp-v ruiv pVjSs'vTi'v puQjUtwy" 

wrE /xaXira XavGavEiv.' — < Quamobrem Rhythmum oportet habere 
orationem, non autem Metrum : sic enim poema erit : 
Neque tamen Rhythmum exquisite habere oportet: Id autem 
erit, si quadamtenus sit, modumque teneat. Ex Rhythmis 
vero Herous, est grandis, et clausulam tardam habens, et 
harmonise indigens. Iambus autem, est ipsa vulgi locutio, 
qnce humilior est. Quamobrem maxime prae omnibus metris 
alils Iambica temere fundunt ii y qui dicunt : Oportebat autem 
sermonem grandiorem effici, et auditorem percellere. Tro- 
chseus autem, ad saltationem Cordacem propi'us accedit: Id 


force and authority of the facts here already above 
cited, as to leave scarcely any doubt, that it was 
Pseonic or Bacchiac. 

* perspicuum faciunt Tetrametra ex eodem constituta: Nam Te- 
4 trametra, sunt volubilis Rhythmus. Reliquus verQ est ¥f&9&> 
e quo plerique Oratores usi sunt, initio ducto a Thrasy macho ; 
6 non potuerunt vero dicere, Quinam esset. Est autem Paean 

* genus tertiutn, et consequens iis Rhytkmis, qui dicti sunt ; 

* Habet enim se, ut Duo ad Tria : Illorum autem unum quidem* 
1 genus sc. Herons, est ut Unum ad Unum ; alterum vero, ut 
' Iambus et Trochceus, est ut Duo ad Unum : Rationibus autem 
6 his consequens est <?«, quce dicitur Sesqui-altera : Haec autem 
6 est ipse Paean, Ac alii quidem Rhythmi abjiciendi erunt, turn 
' ob ea utique quag dicta sunt, turn quia sunt Metris aptiores; 
6 Psean vero sumcndus : Ab hoc enim solo ex omnibus qui dicti 
« sunt Rhythmis, non fit Metrum ; ita ut auditor em maxima 

* lateat.' 



Every Kind of Poetry admits all equivalent Feet. 

Reason for admitting an exchange of one foot for another equi- 
valent in value.— The musical principle adopted, by which 
an exchange of one bar for any other equivalent in value of 
time is allowed. — Two short syllables equal to one long. — 
The Spondee admitted in Heroic Poetry, in exchange for 
the Dactyl. — The Bacchius, Cretic, Antibacchius, &c. 
admitted into the Pseonic. — The Tribrachys received in the 
Iambic, instead of the Iambus. — Heroic Poetry admits only 
feet exactly equivalent. — But in Pesonic were received 
metres of six times, in exchange for those of five — And in 
the Iambic, those of four, instead of those of three. — Ne- 
cessity the reason for this, in order to prevent the too great 
exclusion of words and subjects 

XI ad Poetry been always restricted to the use of 
that fundamental foot alone, from which it was 
denominated, it must have been a tiresome mono- 
tony, irksome to the ear, by reason of the perpe- 
tual recurrence of the same measure, and ex- 
tremely confined in its subjects ; as multitudes of 
words, without which, some ideas could not be 
correctly or definitely expressed, must have been 
unavoidably rejected, because those words were 
not of the requisite quantity. It was not, there- 
fore, to favour the idleness or ignorance of the 

G 4 



Poets, that equivalent feet were admitted, In ex- 
change for the fundamental ones, as some persons 
have unjustly and injudiciously supposed ; but the 
method was reasonably and wisely adopted, for 
the laudable purpose of enriching Poetry with 
sentiments and expressions, for which no place in 
it could otherwise have been found. The neces- 
sity for introducing these, and varying the mea- 
sure, but still within the limits of each foot or 
metre, a restraint requisite to confine it within 
the correct idea of Poetry and Metre, suggested 
the adoption of the musical principle, by which 
one bar may be exchanged, as it perpetually is in 
all musical compositions, for any other, equivalent 
in value of time, although different in the order 
of succession of the long and short quantities, and 
also in the number of the notes : for these last, 
being increased in number in proportion as their 
value is less, complete, in the whole, the aggre-. 
gate value of the greater, for which they are ex- 
changed, and which are proportionabiy fewer z . 

z This is a fact, so well known to all acquainted with Music,, 
as to need with them no proof; but, lest those ignorant of 
Music should be inclined to question it, were no evidence of 
it produced, it is necessary here to mention, that not a page 
of the works of Handel, Corelli, and all the great masters can 
be inspected, without finding abundance of instances of this 
practice, which is indeed the foundation of all variety. Nor can 
this be said to be only a modern invention, for the principle was 
evidently acknowledged by the ancients themselves, when they 
admitted, as they have done, in Heroic verse and elsewhere, 
the exchange of the Spondee for the Dactyl. 


A bar in Music answers to a foot or metre in 
Poetry, and by a similar method they therefore 
proceeded in Poetry, reckoning two short syl- 
lables equivalent to one long a . Neither is there 
ground, either from the specimens of their prac- 
tice, or other evidence, to infer, that they re- 
jected any one of the possible changes which 
might thus be produced, or restrained any one to 
a particular station, as some persons have in both 
instances erroneously imagined they did ; a step 
which, in either case, would have been highly un- 
reasonable, as the musical principle excluded none, 
and limited no situation. 

Upon this principle, in Heroic Poetry the Spon- 
dee was received as a substitute for the Dactyl ; 
the Bacchius, Cretic, Antibacchius, &c. were, in 
like manner, admitted in the Paeonic, in lieu of 
the Paeons ; and in the Iambic, the Tribrachys, 
instead of the Iambus. In the first named of the 
three sorts, the Heroic, the poets have strictly 
adhered to the principle of using none but feet 
exactly equivalent. But, in the Paeonic and Iam- 
bic, they acted otherwise ; for, knowing very well 
that few ears were so nice as to be capable of dis- 
covering the difference of so small a disparity as the 
proportion of 5 to 6, or even of 3 to 4, they, for 

a * Longam esse duorum temporum, brevem unius, etiar 
* pueri sciunt.' Quintilian, edit. 8vo. Lond. 1641, p. 444.- 
« Nam ubicunque s} 7 lJaba longa est, ibi duo breves poni possunt 
Victorious, edit. Putsch, col. 2571. 


the purpose, no doubt, of obtaining a much greater 
latitude for variety, and extent for subject, senti- 
ment, and expression, introduced into the Paeonic, 
the Choriambus, Molossus, and other feet, equal 
in value to six short syllables, intermixed with the 
Paeons, and other feet, which were only equal to 
five b . With the same view, they admitted into 
the Iambic, the Spondee, the Anapaest, and the 
Dactyl, each equal to four short syllables, incor- 
porating them with the Iambus and Tribrachys, 
which were only equal to three. Necessity, no 
doubt, arising from the genius of the language in 
which they wrote, inevitably compelled them to 
this change, the want of which in the Latin lan- 
guage at least, was so great, that, without receiv- 
ing the Spondee in exchange for the Iambus, ten 
out of the twelve cases, of all dissyllable nouns, 
formed on the models of Musa and Regnum, 
where the first syllable was long, must have been 
wholly excluded. To these additional feet they 
seem also to have applied the same musical prin- 
ciple as they had already used as to the rest, and 
to have received into the Iambic all such feet as 
were equal either to three or four short syllables ; 

b This will be actually seen to have been (he case, in 
the instances of the Bacchiac, Cretic, and Paeonic verses, 
-which the reader will find given in Section XX. of this Inquiry; 
and the disparity here is less than in the case of Iambic, which 
has never been disputed ; as, in the instance of the Paeonic and 
the rest, it amounts to no more than one sixth of the greater 
number, while that in Iambic is equal to one fourth. 


and into the Pseonic, all those of every kind, 
which were equivalent to five or six short syl- 
lables, without any distinction, in either case, as 
to the situation, because no good reason can be 
given for any such distinction. 



No Licences admissible. 

A general perception of what is right, asserted by Cicero.— 
How far this true. — This improved constitutes Taste. — This 
Perception and Taste the foundation of Rules. — Precepts did 
not precede but follow the invention of arts. — Definition of 
a Law. — Its obligation equal in all similar cases. — Every devi- 
ation from rule a defect. — Deviation cannot be justified. — No 
instance of necessity. — Poetical Licences perpetually claimed 
by the Grammarians. — Horace objects to all deviations 
from rule. — Passages from him. — Poetical Licences no other 
than blemishes. — Licences supposed where none existed. — 
All objectionable, as deviations from rule.— Rule intended 
to produce excellence, and prevent error and deformity.—- 
Priscian says violations of Prosodia frequent among dra- 
matic writers— And that Terence used them more than 
others — If so, they are not models of excellence — And 
Terence is more culpable than all others. — It cannot be 
supposed the audience would have tolerated them. — Con- 
stant violation of rule, and perpetual variety of verse, would 
render all Prose Verse. — If indulgences unlimited, impos- 
sible to decide as to the nature of any species of Poetry. — 
Poetical Licences not authorized by violent elisions and 
contractions in manuscripts, because they occur in prose 
works also. — Instances of this kind in the Florentine Pandect. 
. — A similar example in Terence, edit, 1479. — Affectations of 
Ennius and Lucretius no justification for Poetical Licences. 
—No pretence that rules of Prosodia different in Plautus, 
Terence, Virgil, qr Horace's times. — Nature of apparent 
variations from rule ill understood. — Not violations of rule. 
>— Licentious readings sometimes preferred. — Motive to this 


a wish in the Critic to display his own learning. — Poetical 
Licences, doubtful, if any really exist in Virgil and Horace. 
— Many Licences removable by the application of the 
musical principle for the reception of all equivalent feet. — > 
Others may be prevented by preferring another reading. — 
Others are merely an observation of some rule in the Greek 
Prosodia, where the Latin had not followed it — And the 
remainder, principally, if not wholly, consist of contrac- 
tions of vowels or dissolutions of diphthongs. — They do not 
therefore affect the quantities of syllables. 

Cicero has observed, that the human mind is 
possessed of a species of Perception, by which all 
men are enabled, without any art or reason, to 
judge what is right or wrong in the arts, or con- 
clusive or fallacious in reasoning or argument . 
To a certain extent, this is unquestionably true ; 
but, as here stated, the proposition is too general 
and extensive ; for, were it universally true, there 
could be no such thing as false Taste, or erroneous 
Judgment. No man ever doubted, for instance, 
whether he saw, on a sign, an horse, a cow, or a 
dog painted ; or was unable to say whether the re- 
presentation corresponded or not with the original. 
Plain common Sense will always be sufficient to 
discern the necessary rational conclusion and con- 
sequence from a few established facts, although 
more of intellect will be requisite to separate and 
decide on complex ideas.. This Perception, im- 
proved by Intellect and Reflection, and founded on 

c * Omnes tacito quodam sensu, sine ulla arte aut ratione, 
' quae sint in artibus ac rationibus recta ac prava dijudicant.'— 
Cic. De Orat. lib. i. 


sound reason, constitutes Taste ; and, sanctioned 
by the correspondence of opinion between men of 
the greatest endowments and powers of judgment^ 
is reasonably assumed as the rule for determining 
the merit or defect of productions in all arts and 
sciences, of the efforts of the human mind, or of 
the compositions of Genius. It is, however, true, 
that the principles, in after-times thus settled by 
the approbation of the judicious, were not at first 
promulgated as a guide, anterior to their actual 
employment ; but, on the contrary, a vigorous 
mind has, to some individual, engaged in a fa- 
vourite pursuit, suggested the principle as reason- 
able. By this he was induced to try the experi- 
ment, the success of which has been so evident, 
that all persons, of the best understandings and 
most extensive knowledge, have immediately per- 
ceived the beneficial effect, and adopted the prin- 
ciple as a rule. Precepts did not, therefore, pre- 
cede, but follow the invention of Arts ; and the 
rules and principles of each were obtained and 
settled, from the experience of the success, which 
had attended the actual instances, in which the 
mode of conduct enjoined by the subsequent rule, 
had already previously occurred 1 . A Law in ge- 
neral has been correctly defined, as the perfection 

d ' Nee enira artibus editis factum est, ut argumenta inve- 

* niremus, sed dicta sunt omnia, antequam prseciperentur ; mox 

* ea scriptores observata, et collecta ediderunt.' — Quintilian, as 
cited by Pope, as a note on his Essay on Criticism. Pope's 
Works, edit. 1740, vol. i. p. 109* 


bf Reason, as founded on the Nature of Things, and 
as commanding what ought to be done, and pro- 
hibiting the contrary e . Whether the subject of 
inquiry be Morals or Science, Jurisprudence or 
Criticism, the nature of a Law is still invariably the 
same; and its object is to ascertain and teach the 
mode by which excellence may be attained and 
produced, and error and deformity avoided f . Truth 
cannot ever be false : Theft can at no time cease 
to be a crime: Beauty can never become De- 
formity; nor can what is a fair and just conclusion 
at one time, be unjust or erroneous at another. 
The obligation of a Rule is, therefore, in all simi- 
lar cases, equal ; and an option either to follow, 
or reject it, is an idea not consistent or reconcile- 
able with any principle of common Sense. Nor 
can its authority be at any time set aside by any 
thing short of the intervention of some circum- 
stance, which should so vary the case, that the 
original principle which prevailed in the former, 
should no longer be reasonable in the latter. Every 
deviation from rule, where no difference of cir- 
cumstance exists, must, therefore, inevitably be a 
defect ; and even were it, perhaps, accompanied 

e ' Est autem Lex Ratio summa, insita natura, quae jubet ea, 
1 quae facienda sunt, prohibetque contraria. Eadem Ratio, cum 
* est in mente homim's confirmata, et confecta, est Lex.* — Ci- 
cero De Legibus, lib. i. as cited by Langius, Polyanthea, edit, 
fo). Lugduni, 1648, col. 1546. 

f ' Lex est recti pracceptio pravique depulsio.' -—Cicero De 
Natura Deorum, lib. ii. cited by Langius also, ubi supra, 


by some great excellence in other parts, which 
might, in some measure, produce a reluctance to 
censure the blemish, yet a blemish it still would 
be, and it could not be justified or reconciled to 
a rational mind. 

No necessity for deviations from rule, even in 
the case of proper names, or such words as must 
themselves be introduced to convey the idea, can 
be pleaded in Poetry, when its nature and rules, 
both of which have been much misunderstood, 
come to be fully and fairly explained. Every spe- 
cies of Poetry admits all the possible changes of 
equivalent quantities s ; but of this fact the gram- 
marians have been ignorant ; and the difficulties 
which they have supposed necessarily to require 
Poetical Licences for their solution, have, as will 
be decidedly shown in the course of this Inquiry, 
no real existence h . In every event the difficulty 
may be evaded by the original author, either by 
substituting some synonymous word, or new-form- 
ing the whole sentence, for which, almost univer- 
sally, some other equivalent mode of expression, 
and frequently more than one, may readily be found. 
The mind of an expert author will spontaneously 
suggest multitudes of such changes ; and the in- 
ability to make such a variation, when necessary, 
argues poverty of ideas, and a confined knowledge 
of the language in which he is writing. 

s See Sect. VII, h See Sect. XXV. 


Notwithstanding these obvious conclusions, 
those who have undertaken to examine the laws of 
versification, as deducible from the writings of 
the Greek and Latin Poets, are perpetually claim- 
ing exemptions from rule, under the name of Po- 
etical Licences, whenever their own want of in- 
formation has rendered them incapable of account- 
ing for what they conceived deviations from the 
established practice of later ages. To their species 
or their frequency they have not prescribed any 
limits ; nor have they laid down any principle 
upon which they were supposed to be founded. 
This awkward expedient, for the purpose of conceal- 
ing their ignorance, they would not have adopted, 
had they been able to discern that, as some 
changes of equivalent quantities in the feet of the 
verses were already acknowledged, even by them- 
selves, it was equally reasonable to admit all, of 
which those quantities were capable; because they 
all rested on the very same principle — that the 
more frequent use of one sort does not amount to 
an exclusion of others, and that rarity of use does 
not constitute prohibition. Against all such al- 
lowances, as tending to lessen excellence, Horace 
has decidedly given his testimony ; and, although 
the instance to which he alludes, cannot, indeed, 
be said to be Poetical Licences, or violations of 
quantity, for no such does he notice, yet the ground 
of his objection manifestly consists in this, that 
such deviations are breaches of those verv laws 
which were intended and calculated for the im~ 



provement of Art. The objection is insuperable, 
and not only applies with equal force against all 
disregard of such reasonable restraints, but is still 
of greater and more universal extent and influence, 
as affecting the nature of all Laws in general. 
In his Art of Poetry, line 86, he says, 

4 Descriptas servare vices operumque colores, 
* Cur ego, si nequeo ignoroque, poeta salutor ? 
6 Cur nescire, pudens prave, quam discere malo ?' 

Again, censuring the introduction of foreign, bar- 
barous, or unauthorized words-, he thus expresses 
himself, v. 45 : 

* In verbis etiam tenuis cautusque ferendus 
' Dixeris egregie, notum si callida verbum 

* Reddiderit junctura novum, si forte necesse est. 

* Indiciis monstrare recentibus abdita rerum, 
s Fingere cincturis non exaudita Cethegis, 

* Continget, dabiturque licenlia, sumpta pudenter, 
4 Et nova fictaque nuper habebunt verba fidem, si 

c Grseco fonte cadant, parce detorta. Quid autem 
4 Caecilio, Plautoque dabit Romanus ademptum 
1 Virgilio, Varioque ?* 

And, lastly, v. 260, objecting to the too frequent 
introduction of the Spondee in Iambic verse, as 
tending to make the verse run slowly and heavily, 
he thus delivers his own sentiments : 

6 In scenam missus, magno cum pondere, versus, 

* Aut operas celeris nimium curssque carentis, 
i Aut ignoratae premit artis crimine turpi. 

* Non quivis videt immodulata poemata judex 
4 Et data Romanis venia est indigna poetis. 


• Idcircone vager ? scribamque licenter ? an omnes 

* Visuros peccata putem mea tutus et infra 

* Spem veniee cautus ? vitavi denique culpam, 

* Non laudem merui* Vos exemplaria Graeca 

* Nocturna versate manu, versate diurna. 

* At nostri proavi Plautinos et numeros et 

* Laudavere sales, nimium patienter ut rum que, 
' Ne dicam stulte mirati, si modo ego et vos 

* Scimus inurbanum lepido seponere dicto, 

' Legitimumque sonum digitis callemus et aure.' 

No man can possibly be so prejudiced in his 
opinion, as to contend that Poetical Licences, even 
if allowed, are any other than blemishes, which 
have been claimed, as existing in classic authors, 
in consequence of the ignorance and errors of the 
copyists of manuscripts, and the erroneous limita- 
tion of the rules of. Prosodia. In some instances 
Licences have been supposed, where none really 
existed 1 . The reasonable extension of the prin- 
ciple for exchanging equivalent feet, so as to admit 
all the possible variations, instead of confining it 
to a few only, has been found sufficient to re- 
move many, if not most, of those Licences usually 
claimed; and there cannot be a doubt that the 
correction of the text according to the rules of 
Prosodia, which has always been found possible, 
or the preference of one reading, where no Licence 
existed, to another, in which one occurred, would 
completely destroy all occasion for the rest. These 

1 See this proved in Section XXV. infra. 


facts will be shown in a subsequent Section k , by 
an examination of the instances themselves. In 
the mean time it is sufficient to say, that the idea 
of Poetical Licences is in the highest degree ab- 
surd, because they are deviations from rule, and 
that all rule is, or ought to be, the guide for the 
production of excellence, and the prevention of 
error and deformity j. 

If it can be supposed that violations of Pro- 
sodia, in the particulars mentioned by Priscian, 
are, as he says, more frequently to be found 
in the dramatic writers, and in Terence more fre- 
quently than in the rest 1 ", it must follow of course, 

k See Section XXV. 

! The bad effect of Poetical Licences in general, is suffi- 
ciently conspicuous from the following example : Milton, who 
appears to have been very conversant with the classics, is per- 
petually solicitous to show his familiarity with them, by intro- 
ducing into his Paradise Lost, imitations of all their Poetical 
Licences, as far as he was able, writing, as he did, in a dif- 
ferent language. By this extreme pedantry, his style and ver- 
sification have, in many instances, been rendered so egregiously 
harsh, dissonant, stiff, and disgusting, that it is difficult to read 
it so as to produce any thing like metre, and it is scarcely 
tolerable. No reader, without considerable effort, can conquer 
his reluctance and dislike of the versification, so far as to con- 
sider the sublimity of the poet's images and sentiments ; and to 
that circumstance, more than any other, is attributable the 
little regard paid to that poem, from the time of its first publi- 
cation, till it was brought into notice by the publication of an 
edition of the Paradise Lost, by Tonson, in 1711, and the cri- 
ticisms on that poem in The Spectator. 

m ' At illud quoque sciendum, quod omnes quidem crebris 
* synalcephis, et episynalcephis, et collisionibus, et abjectionibus 


that, instead of being what they have been repre- 
sented, the models of excellence,, the dramatic 
poets were the most ignorant or most negligent of 
all classes of poets ; and that., of this wretched 
and contemptible set, Terence, in proportion as 
he exceeded them in the frequency of his trans- 
gressions, was by far the most culpable. But the 
supposition is in itself contrary to reason ; nor can 
it be imagined that 5 if the practice had ever been 
attempted, such perpetual violations as the gram- 
marians have claimed as allowable, would ever 
have been tolerated by an audience, who, as Ci- 
cero describes them, would have hissed an actor, 
if he had pronounced a syllable longer or shorter 
than its due quantity". 

* S literae, sint usi scandendo versus suos. Terentius autem plus 
' omnibus.' — Priscian, De Versibus Comicis, edit, Putsch, col. 

n * Si versus pronuntiatus est una syllaba longior vel bre^vior, 

* exsibilatur et exploditur histrio.' Cicero, Paradoxo tertio. — - 
« In versu quidem theatra tota exclamant, si fiat una syllaba 

* brevior aut longior, nee vero multitudo pedes novit, nee ullos 

* numeros tenet, nee illud, quod offendit, aut curant, aut in 

* quo offendat intelligit, et tamen omnium longitudinem et bre- 
' vitatem in sonis, sicut acutantur, graviumque vocum judicium 
% ipsa ratione in auribus nostris collocavit.' Cicero, Orator, edit, 
!8mo. Glasg. 1748, ex edit. Jo. Olivet, sect. li. p. 90.— Plutarch, 
in his Lives, p. 845, mentions that Demosthenes was hissed by 
the Athenians, for pronouncing Ag-jcXhotop, with the accent on 
the Antepenultima, instead of the Ultima. See the passage 
in a note, in Plutarch's own words, in Manwaring's Stichology, 
p. 26, thus : "fl/xvvE $s xoci tov 'Ao-jtX*)7riov, irQovretfv%vvuv 'Aa-KXr/Tnov* 
4 xa.i Kixps&ivvi* uvtov 6fQu$ Xsyovrot.' wcci yap tov Gsov ywiov' x.oc\ ivt 

4 txtu ttoXXsmcjs lOafwCsj'Oii/— ^ Plutarch, Decern OrAtor. Vitag, p, 845, 

« 3 


By constant violation of rule, perpetual variety 
in the sorts of verse, for that indulgence is also 
claimed by the grammarians, in favour of the 
dramatic poets, and by a change from one length 
to another, there is nothing which might not be 
rendered poetry, of some kind. All the orations 
in Sallust and Livy may thus be reduced into 
metre of some species or other; and authors, who 
had never conceived they were writing any thing 
more than harmonious prose, would, by efforts 
like these, be transferred to a class of less honour, 
and, instead of being justly considered as able and 
eloquent historians, be reduced to the rank of 
incompetent scribblers, and wretched dabblers in 

But, if the number of indulgences is not to be 
restrained within some limits, and none have been 
assigned to those supposed to exist in comic verse 
particularly, how is it possible to decide as to the 
nature of any species of Poetry ? If its want of 
correspondence with the rules of one sort, is not 
a sufficient reason for excluding a verse from this, 
and its agreement with those of another, an ade- 
quate ground for referring it to that, by what 
guide can any man act? Every man, who has 
written on Metre in general, has been in a con- 
tinual error ; all that has been taught on the sub- 
ject, is deception ; rules and regulations have been 
invented in vain ; and flagrant injustice is daily 
committed in every public and private seminary, 
not only in this kingdom, but throughout Europe, 



whenever punishment for a false quantity in Latin 
or Greek verses is inflicted. 

No support in favour of Poetical Licences can 
be obtained from the violent elisions and contrac- 
tions which occur in manuscripts and early printed 
editions of the Latin Poets, copied, no doubt, from 
manuscripts ; such, for instance, as c necesset,' for 
( necesse esset ;' c sultis,' for f si vultis ;' ' optumu'st/ 
for c optimus est ;' ' surger&,' for ' surgere et ;' and 
others : for these are not metrical elisions or con- 
tractions, but merely those of the copyist, to save 
time, expence, labour, and parchment. A suffi- 
cient quantity of this last it has sometimes been 
found so difficult to procure, that instances are 
well known to those conversant with manuscripts, 
where the whole of a work, written on parchment 
or vellum, has been erased, apparently with a 
knife, or some such sharp instrument, for the pur- 
pose of using the leaves for transcribing some other 
work. Multitudes of leaves, thus erased, are 
frequently found among manuscripts. That these 
contractions were not made for the sake of the 
Metre, is evident, because similar ones equally 
occur in manuscripts of works in prose. Dr. 
Taylor, in his Elements of the Civil Law, p. 20, 
speaking of the famous Florentine manuscript of 
Justinian's Pandect, the age of which Brencman 
refers back to the sixth century, which he says is 
the time of Justinian °, remarks that it is written 

• Brencmanni Historia Pandectarum, seu Fatum Ex.emplaris 
H 4 



in a very singular character, the peculiarity of 
which consists in consolidating the letters of two 
words, when it happens, as it frequently does, that 
those which compose a part of the latter, are con- 
tained in the former, as ' necesset,' instead of ' ne- 
4 cesse esset {) .' This is the instance which he himself 
produces, adding, at the same time, this observa- 
tion, that this compendious method is practised in 
no other manuscript that he knows. But Di\ 
Taylor was evidently not conversant or extensively 
acquainted with manuscripts. Brencman notices 
this erroneous opinion, entertained by some per- 
sons, as to the peculiarity of the character in 
which this manuscript was written, and rightly 
says it was the general mode of writing used in 
manuscripts of that age. It is certain that similar 
peculiarities occur in some of the earliest printed 
books, which are known to have been printed im« 

Florentini, 4to. Trajecti ad Rhenum, 1722, p. 11, on the au« 
thority of Fontanini and Mabillon. 

p See another instance, in the case of the words ' velit litte- 
* ras,' on the authority of Brencman, inserted in Section XXIII. 
hereafter. A similar instance seems to occur in a passage in- 
serted among the prefatory papers, fol. a. 3 a. before the edition 
of Terence printed in 1479, where the words are printed as 
follow : * Nam postquam ocioso tempore, fastidiosior spectator 
' effectus est: tunc cum ad actores ab auctoribus fabula transibaU 
' cum surger& adire ccepisset,' &c. This passage is evidently 
extremely corrupt ; for ' actores,' the sense requires we should 
read * cantores ;' for 6 auctoribus,' 'actoribus;' and for * adire/ 
"' abire:' ' surger&' can mean nothing but c surgere & ;' and so it 
is printed, with the rest of the corrections here noticed, in later 
and more correct editions, particularly in the Delphin, 


mediately from manuscripts, and most probably 
followed, in that, as well as in other particulars, 
their original copy q . 

Nor can the barbarous and pedantic affecta- 
tions of Ennius and Lucretius be produced as any 
evidence of the state of Poetry at the time ; for, 
though Ennius r was contemporary with Plautus 5 , 
yet the language of Ennius, as exhibited in the 
fragments of his writings still remaining, is so 
much more antiquated than that of Plautus, that 
it is evident he did not write in the style of his own 
time, but in that which he supposed to have pre- 
vailed at a much earlier period. His writings may in 
that respect range with the modern imitations of 
Chaucer's style, which have frequently appeared in 
our own country, but cannot be cited as evidence 

i See the preceding note for one instance. Brencman, in 
his Historia Pandectarum, p. 108, says, * Ut bis peccent, qui 
* Literam Pisanam exponunt characterem veterem, quo scripti 
' Pandeetarum libri ; primo quia communem eorum seculorum 
' scripturam peculiarem et propriam faciunt Pandectis Floren- 
' tinis, dein,' &c. 

r Ennius was born in the year of Rome 5 J 6, and died of the 
gout at the age of 70. Konigii Bibliotheca, p. 273. In the 
Life of Ennius, written by Paul Merula, and prefixed to his 
edition of the Fragments of Ennius's Annals, it is said that 
Ennius was born in the year of Rome 514, the year after the 
introduction of Comedy at Rome by Livius Andronicus. En- 
nius was born 239 years before our Saviour, and died 169. 
See Moron's Diet, and the authorities there cited. Saxius says 
he was born Anno Urbis 515, and died Anno Urb. 585. Saxius, 
vol.i. p. 120. 

6 Plautus died in the year of Rome 570. Konigii Bibli- 
otheca, p. 647. Saxius, Onomast. edit. 1775, vol. i. p. 122 3 — 
189 years before our Saviour. Saxius, ibid. 


of the state of the Latin language at any time 1 . 
Into this he also introduced as many corruptions 
and barbarisms as he was able from the language 
of the Osci, a people of Campania, in Italy, so 
barbarous in their speech, as to occasion a proverb, 
in which ' Osce loqui' was meant to imply, that 
those, of whom it was said, were ignorant of the 
Latin language u . On his skill in this corrupt 

* Cicero, in his Orator, edit. Glasguae, 1748, p. 88, sect, 91 » 
says, * Ergo liceat Ennio, vetera contemnenti, dicere : 

" Versibu' quos olim Fauni vatesque canebant," 

* mihi de antiquis eodcm milii non licebit, praesertim cum die- 
1 turus non sum Ante hunc, ut ille, neu quae sequuntur. No$ 

* auri reserare.' 

The same corruption is also noticed by Cicero, in another 
part of the same tract. ' Quin etiam quod jam subrusticum 
i videtur olim autem politius eorum verborum, quorum eaedem 

* erant postremse duae literse, quae sunt in optumus, postremam 

* literam detrahebant, nisi vocalis insequebatur ; ita non erat 

* offensio in versibus, quam nunc fugiunt poetae novi ; ita enim 

* loquebamur, qui est omnibu' princeps, non omnibus princeps, 

* et vita ilia dignu' locoque, non dignus, quod si indocta con- 

* suetudo tarn est artifex suavitatis, quid ab ipsa tandem arte 

* et doctrina postulari putamus ?' Ibid. p. 82, sect. 48. The 
Jine above, from Ennius, may, however, be freed from all 
licence, by reading it, 

Versibus : bos olim Fauni vatesque canebant, 

which it is very likely some manuscript, had it been searched 
for, might have been found to justify. 

u « Titinius Osce et Volsce fabulantur nam Latine nesciunt. 9 
See Flaccus et Festus, a Scaligero, 8vo. 1593, p. cxlvi. — * Osci 
4 diet, ab oris fceditate Fest. unde Osce loqui de iis, qui Latine 

* nesciunt, loqui. People of Campania in Italy.' — Littleton's 


language, he seems to have valued himself % ex^ 
ulting, as it should seem, in the use of such pe- 
culiarities as might tend to distinguish his style 
from that state of improvement, to which, in the 
intermediate space of time, the Latin language 
had attained. Lucretius flourished a century pos- 
terior to Plautus y, and affected to follow the pe- 
dantic conduct of Ennius 5 so that he also is of no 
authority in this point. 

No pretence has ever been offered, that the 
rules of Prosodia, or the quantities of syllables, 
were, in the time of Plautus or Terence, or in 
that when Virgil and Horace flourished, in any 
respect different from what they were at any other 
period, when literature was cultivated or prevailed 
at Rome ; and, indeed, were any such assertion 

K In the Life of Ennius, written by Paul Merula, and pre- 
fixed to his edition of the Fragments of Ennius's Annals, he is 
said to have been ' trium linguarum Graecae, Latinae, et Oscas, 

* peritus.' — Virgil, when found reading the works of Ennius, 
said he was collecting gold from the muck or dross of Ennius. 
' Cum is aliquando Ennium in manu haberet, rogareturque 
' quidnam faceret, respondit se aurum collegisse de stercore 
' Ennii. Habet enim poeta ille egregias sententias sed verbis 

* non multum ornatis.' — Donati Vita Virgilii, inserted Virgil, 
edit. Heyne, 4to. Lond. 1793, vol. i. part i. p. clxxxii. 

y Lucretius was born in the year of Rome 659, and died in 
the year 684. Konigii Bibliotheca, p. 485. His works are said 
to have been written in the intervals between fits of insanity. 
Ibid. Lucretius is placed by Saxius, edit. 1775, vol. i. p. 145, 
78 years before Christ, and said to have been born in the 171st 
Olympiad, Anno Urbis conditae 659, and to have died in the 
177th, Anno Urbis conditae 684. 


attempted, the existing works of those writers 
would be sufficient to refute it. The nature of the 
apparent variations from rule, observable in the 
writings of the Greek and Latin authors, has 
certainly, however, been greatly in reality misun- 
derstood. Most, if not all of them, have been 
found to a certainty to be neither violations, nor 
unrestrained instances of caprice, as they have 
been erroneously imagined % but are founded on 
grounds to which, as it appears, the grammarians 
and critics were strangers. And there is no doubt 
that, either by the application of the extended and 
highly rational principle, which allows the ex- 
change for all equivalent quantities, instead of in- 
judiciously confining it to a few only ; or, by cor- 
recting the text properly, so as to make it consist- 
ent with, and not repugnant to the rules of Proso- 
dia, every supposed error may be reconciled to the 
real nature, and genius, and the rules which ought 
to prevail in every system of Prosodia, professing 
to merit attention. 

Great reason, however, exists for thinking, that,, 
in settling the text of an author, a reading has ? 
on many occasions, been chosen on account of 
the Licence which it required; or that, in spelling 
or placing the words, a mode of orthography or 
arrangement, which produced a Licence, has been 
preferred to one where no such impediment really 

* See Sect. XXV. 


existed a . The motive to this was probably a wish 
in the critic acting thus, to exhibit his own learn- 

a Bentley, in his ' Emendationes ad Ciceronis Tusculanas,' 
inserted at the end of ' Ciceronis Tusculanarum Disputationum 
' Libri V. ex recensione Joannis Davisii, Coll. Regin. Cantab. 

* Socio,' 8vo. Cantab. 1709, p. 49, has, in scanning some 
verses from Ennius, Plautus, and Terence, unnecessarily con- 
sidered them as containing Licences, which, in the proper mode 
of division, do not exist. This will be shown from the instances 
themselves, in Section XX. infra. The following line in Ho- 
mer's Iliad, book i. v. 18, seems also another instance : 

'Y^?y jusy Qsol tfb~sv 'OXvpTiot, ovftoir ef^ovrs;* 

Clarke says, in a note, i Pronuntiabatur Y^tv /*sv Qoi ;' and Schre- 
velius, in his Lexicon, art. Aotsv, says, ' Ao*ev, darent, pro 

* ^oir ( crav, Bceot. et Mo\. 3 pi. a. c l opt. act. a §ow verbi ^^; do ;' 
namely, that it is the third person plural of the second Aorist, 
or Indefinite of the Optative Mood, Active Voice. But the pas- 
sage may be read, without any Licence, instead of the two here 
supposed, by omitting the word Ssot, which, as it stands, injures 
the metre, and contributes nothing to the sense. With this 
omission, the passage would mean, < May those, who dwell in 

* the habitations of Olympus, grant,' &c. A similar ex- 
pression occurs in our translation of the Psalms, as it stands 
in the Common Prayer Book, Psalm ii. v. 4-, ' He that dwelleth 

* in heaven shall laugh them to scorn.' The line in Homer, if 
Qsoi were omitted, as it clearly ought to be, would then stand 
thus : and there would be no necessity for corrupting * ktwai' 
to «'&«>.' 

In the original perhaps Geo* was only a marginal note, and by ac- 
cident crept into the text. 

Another similar instance of the preference of a reading 
where a Licence exists, to one without any such blemish, seems 
to occur in Virgil's Georgics, lib. i. v. 281. The line is this: 

* Ter sunt conati imponere Pelio Ossam," 

which might easily be read, 

Ter conati sunt imponere Pelion Ossam, 



ing\, and to show that he was acquainted with 
the opinions of former Grammarians. On such a 
knowledge of these variations from rule, which 
tend more to corrupt, than correct the Greek 
and Latin Poets, many men have much valued 
themselves, and have endeavoured to found on it, 
a reputation for classical learning. In searching 
for opportunities of thus displaying their know- 
ledge, they have shown no common degree of as- 
siduity, and have proved themselves more anxious 
to be distinguished for this kind of pedantry, than 
for a correct and discriminating judgment to de- 
tect error, and restore passages, disfigured by the 
blemishes of Poetical Licences, to the regulation of 
rule, and the controul of acknowledged principles. 
Infinitely more benefit would have accrued to the 
cause of Learning, had these men simply preserved 
and exhibited the various readings of the text, 
which had fallen in their way, or might have been 
obtained, on collating and comparing the several 
copies, especially if manuscripts, or early printed 

The transposition removes the objection arising from the eli^ 
sion; and the circumstance of 'impcnere' being a compound, of 
which the preposition makes a part, would justify the reading 
* Pelio,' ' Pelion.' Thus corrected, it would, in fact, amount to 
no more than saying, Ponere Pelion in Ossam, which is strictly 
and grammatically right. Ruddiman, p. 144, gives from Mar* 
tial the following line ; 

* Si quid nostra tuis adieit vexatio rebus/ 

in which he says * adieit' is put for * adjicit.' But why may it not 
i>e read as follows, and then no Licence can occur ? 
Si quid nostra tuis addat vexatio rebus. 


editions, with each other ; because,- from them, in 
all probability, one reading, at least, free from 
any such objection, might, in almost every real or 
apparently faulty instance, have been furnished, 
by which the difficulty might have been avoided, 
and the passage have been reconciled to strict and 
reasonable rule. Every true and judicious critic 
knows, that, where correction becomes necessary, 
in consequence of manifest corruption and depra- 
vation, that change is always the best, which in- 
troduces a reading exactly conformable to rule ; 
and that that editor, who does not endeavour, in 
his corrections, to make his author's text agree- 
able to the nicest laws established on such occa- 
sions, but, on the contrary, augments the number 
of licences and deviations, disfigures, instead of 
reforming, and corrupts, instead of improving his 

Every reason has, on experiment, been found 
for conceiving the apparent Poetical Licences in 
Virgil and Horace, either merely the consequence 
of the due extension of the rule for the exchange 
of equivalent quantities, or corruptions introduced 
into the text by the ignorance of copyists and 
grammarians, in consequence of their erroneous 
system of Prosodia. Collations of manuscripts 
would, no doubt, remove many of these, by af- 
fording a reading free from Licence. That the ear- 
lier writers, Plautus and Terence, however un- 
justly taxed with negligence and incompetence of 
this kind, were equally free from the absurdity of 


wilful transgressions and violations of rule, will 
manifestly appear to all unprejudiced minds, in 
the course of the ensuing pages, as it will also, 
how grossly those have erred, who, like the gram- 
marians, have considered rarity of occurrence as 
equivalent to prohibition ; and, to cover their own 
ignorance, have, in consequence of this, unjustly 
attributed to the Poets a defect of judgment and 
want of skill to restrain their thoughts and ex- 
pressions within the proper and requisite bounds. 

In the case of Greek and Latin Poetry, there- 
fore, it is believed it may with truth be affirmed, 
that some of the instances of supposed Poetical 
Licences have been misunderstood, and are no 
Licences when the lines are correctly scanned b . 

That many of them will be entirely removed 
by the admission of the very rational musical 
principle, by which all equivalent feet may be re- 
ceived in all situations ; and these, therefore, are 
no Licences, but the consequences and observances 
of rule c . 

That many more may in all probability be re- 
medied, by preferring a reading, where no such 
Licence occurs d . 

That other Poetical Licences will only be found 
an observation of the original rule in the Greek 

b See some instances from Plautus and Terence, as given by 
Bentley, inserted in Sect. XX. 

c See some such in Sect. XXV. and IX. 

d See some such readings suggested, Sect. XXV. 


Prosodia, in an instance where the Latin had not 
followed it e . 

And that the remainder will principally, if 
not wholly, consist of contractions of two vowels 
into one, upon the principle of a diphthong ; or 
dissolutions of a diphthong into two vowels, on 
the idea of the vowels being- separate. But these, 
as being of so very slight a nature, so limited in 
their kind and number, and merely affecting the 
orthography of a very few syllables, scarcely merit 
the name of Licences, or require any defence or 

See also Sect, XXV, 



Heroic Verse, ivhat Feet that receives. 

Besides the Dactyl and Spondee, it admits the Anapaest, Am- 
phibrachys, and Proceleusma.— Anapaest, an example of, 
from Homer. — Another from Virgil. — Another from Horace* 
— Amphibrachys, an example of, from Homer. — Four ex- 
amples from Virgil.— Proceleusma, an instance of. — Several 
from Virgil.— -These feet admissible at the end of the verse 
also.— Dactyl, examples of.— Anapaest, instances of. — Am- 
phibrachys, instance of. 

Besides the Dactyl and Spondee, universally ac- 
knowledged as admissible in Heroic verse, it will 
be found, on examination, that the Anapaest, the 
Amphibrachys, and the Proceleusma, were at 
times occasionally also received : for, by transpos- 
ing the long and short syllables of the Dactyl, 
the two former might be obtained ; by dissolving 
its long syllable into two short, the latter; and, by 
the admission of these, together with the Dactyl 
and Spondee, all the varieties were completed and 
afforded, of which one long and two short syl- 
lables, the quantity of the Dactyl, were capable. 
No more reason exists for excluding these three 
kinds of feet, than for rejecting the Spondee or 
Dactyl themselves, nor any cause for restraining 
them to certain situations only. Their actual in- 


traduction, in all places, will be equally seen from 
the following examples from Homer, Virgil, and 
Horace ; nor is there any more ground for ques- 
tioning the authority of these instances, than to 
dispute the validity of those by which the use 
of the Dactyl and Spondee has been already esta- 

Homer, in the very first line of the first book 
of his Iliad, has employed an Anapaest in the fifth 
place : 

This the grammarians have endeavoured to pre- 
vent, by asserting, that the two last syllables of 
UriXrjiochou are contracted into one, so as to produce 
a long syllable there ; and that the second syllable 
of KyjKKriog is rendered short, by the rejection of 
one of the letters, A, by which, as it stands in the 
verse, it is at present made long f . The effect of 
this process would be, to transform the whole foot 
from an Anapaest to a Dactyl ; but this could not 
be accomplished, without three Poetical Licences in 
one foot, and two of them on the same syllable, 
which is highly unreasonable : for the two syl- 
lables, above mentioned, must first be contracted 

f See the note on the passage in Dr. Clarke's edition of 
Homer, and also in that by Camerarius, small fo. In officina 
Hervagiana, 1541. To favour this supposition, the word is 
erroneously printed with one x, in Camerariiis's, Schrevelius's, 
and Dr. Ckirke's editions, and perhaps in others. 

I 2 



into one ; and again, which the grammarians do 
not notice, the syllable, when thus contracted, 
must be prevented from suffering elision with the 
first syllable of the next word, which, as that be- 
gins with a vowel, it regularly would ; and, lastly, 
as before observed, the second syllable of A%/AA« 
must undergo a change from long to short. The 
violence of this step is contrary to all reason, and 
totally unnecessary. If the foot be considered as 
an Anapaest, as, in its natural state, it really and 
unquestionably is, its quantity is exactly equal in 
value to the Dactyl, of which it is in fact merely 
a transposition. There is no contraction; the 
syllables all remain in their natural quantities ; 
and the regular elision, authorized by rule, takes 
place in the absorption of the last syllable of ILj- 
X7\i(/2ioo with the first in A%/AAw. But, further, 
TLtjXviiahou, as it stands above, which Schrevelius, 
in his Lexicon, art. rfyto7/a$sa;, describes as the 
Ionic genitive by the exchange of yji for ei 3 and 
of sou for *, is not necessary to the metre of the 
verse : for the simple genitive, n^A^fe, without 
resorting to the Ionic dialect, will, without any 
change in the last of these instances, correctly 

stand thus : 

\j v _ 

Myjviv ci\siSs 6s\c6 tlr}\h^'iti\^H ^AyjK^og. 

because only one half of the diphthong a is ab- 
sorbed in the first syllable of A%/AAw, a practice 
which perpetually prevails, and occurs in Homer, 
Many other instances of this kind may also be 


produced from Homer, some of which had been 
actually noted down, and can even now be at 
any time found, but it was thought unnecessary to 
multiply examples. 

Virgil has used a similar foot in the following 
line : 

' Fluviorum rex Eridanus camposque per omnes ** 

if the grammarians, for their own purposes, and 
to favour their own system of Licences, have not, 
as it is probable they have, preferred the above 
order of the words, to reading them thus, which 
is certainly, it must be confessed, by far the more 
musical : 

Eridanus fluviorum rex camposque per omnes. 

In the former case, the first foot is an Anapaest % 

Fluvio-rum rex | Eridajnus cam|posque per | omnes, 

which the grammarians have endeavoured to con- 
vert into a Dactyl, by altering the quantities of 
the first and third syllables, or into a Spondee, by 
changing the quantity of the first syllable, and 
contracting the second and third syllables into one 

£ Virgil, Georg. lib. ii. v. 482. Ruddiman, Grammatical 
Latinse lnstitutiones, 12mo. Edinb. 1756, p. 142, says, that the 
i is absorbed before the o, and that £ Fluviorum' is a trisyllable, 
which last assertion he again repeats, p. 147 ; but it is evident 
this does not cure the whole difficulty, as the first syllable of 
1 Fluviorum' still remains, as it naturally is, short, 

I 3 


long one h . For this change of quantity, in either 
case, no reason can be discovered, except that 
their system required either a Dactyl or a Spondee 
in this place, neither of which could be other- 
wise obtained ; but this is no adequate cause. It 
is evident, from the natural quantities of the syl- 
lables, that an Anapaest is here used; and there 
is no occasion for any change of quantity or licence 
of any sort, because the admission of the Anapaest 
is perfectly consistent with the principle of receiv- 
ing all equivalent quantities in exchange. 

Horace, in his Epistles, lib. ii. ep. ii. v. 120, 
has also employed an Anapaest, exactly in the same 
place of the verse with the above example from 
Virgil. The instance is this : 

Vehemens | & liquijdus pu]roque sijmillimus | amniJ, 

h Ruddiman, in his * Grammaticae Latinas Institutiones,' 
12mo. 6th edit. Edinb. 1731, p. 142, says, ' Fluviorum* is here 
rendered a trisyllable, by absorbing one of the two vowels in 
the other. See also ibid. p. 141. 147; but he does not notice 
any change in the quantity of the first syllable of * Fluvi* rum/ 
which consequently would remain short, as it is naturally. 

1 Ruddiman, p« 141, says, that « Vehemens' is here ren- 
dered a dissyllable. ' Vehemens,' as here used, was certainly a 
wilful deviation from its real and usual quantity, because Ho* 
race himself, in the first book of his Epistles, Epist. 13, uses 
It in the accustomed manner, in the following line : 

Sedulus | imporjtes ope|ra vehe | mente minister. 
Ralph Winterton, in his Observations on Hesiod, among the 
« Poefae Minores Graeci,' 12mo. Cantab. 1635, in a note on the 
* Operum et Dierum Liber,' lib. i. v. 20, gives that line thus: 

"Ht= kxI TTsp o/awj £7T/ epycv £yc/pu» 



which the commentator on the Delphin edition 
has not noticed, or attempted to explain ; but it 
is as it stands an indubitable example ; and Bond, 
in his edition, 12mo. Lond. 1660, admits, p. 291, 
that it is an instance of an Anapoest for a Spondee. 
Of the use of the Amphibrachys, the following 
instances occur. Homer uses it, in the first place 
of each of the three first of the following examples, 
and in the last place of the fourth line : 

Koog s\yw 7rspl j Kctvot 7to\Xio£ (3io\tov a~vvci\<ysiQov . 
Ecfjg o | tccvS* wfouaivB xoc\tu (ppeva | xou nociu ] 6v[aov K 
Tsug Alx/zioi | jLtsy psy s\xji^ocvov 9 \ ovvsk AfyiXXivg in . 
Xafat/Sa | t\ E!pSTf)i\otv ts 9 7ro\Xvgol(pv\Xoy O^lg^ociocv^, 

On this he remarks that Gretser makes aa-aXa/ay a Dactyl, in his 
Grammar, but that it is undoubtedly an Anapaest for a Dactyl. 
The original line is, however, in one place, evidently corrupt, 
though certainly not in that to which Winterton refers. It 
should be 

v Hte xaj< o.7raA«jW.jyoy 7T£p ojjutw^ sVj j o t°yov z\yiifti. 

k Odyss. lib. A, v. 90. 

1 Iliad, lib. 2, v. 15. 

m Iliad, lib. Y, v. 42. Kirchner, in his Prosodia Gr£eca s 
in the Epitome prefixed to it, under the first of the three ex- 
ceptions to the first rule, on the nature of short syllables, art. 4. 
admits that, in this line, an Amphibrachys is placed instead of 
a Dactyl. So he does, also, in the preceding instance above. 

* Iliad, lib. 0, v, 537, edit. Clarke. Priscian, edit. Putsch, 
col. 1320, in his tract ' De Metris Comicis,' says, that s, 
among the Greeks, often loses the power of a consonant, of 
which he gives the above line as a specimen ; but it is not here 
the fact. 

* 4 


By Virgil it is used in the 211th line of his ^neid, 
book iii. thus : 

Insulae Ionio in magno, quas dira Celaeno. 

The grammarians contend, that, in the first foot, 
the dipththong is rendered short °, because of the 
succeeding vowel; and that the three first syl- 
lables of ' Ionio' are, by altering the quantities of 
two of them, converted into a Dactyl. As scanned 
by them, therefore, the line would stand thus : 

Insulae | lonijo in mag|no quas J dira Cejlaeno, 

an example of submission and contradiction to 
rule, at the same time, which can never surely be 
tolerated. But, besides, this mode would require 
two Licences in the first, and two in the second 
foot. The diphthong, in the first, must not only 
be changed into a short syllable, but the natural 
elision between that and the first vowel in the next 
word, must be prevented. In the second foot, the 
first syllable, which, as being followed by a vowel, 
is short, must be rendered long; and the second syl- 
lable, which is long, because the word is of Greek 
origin, and in that language written with the letter 
a, the long o, must be treated as if it was short. 
The grammarians are, however, in both instances, 
evidently and decidedly wrong ; for the two syl- 

° Ruddiman, p. 139, says, that long vowels and diphthongs, 
when they do not suffer elision, are common ; but that some- 
times they are short, as Virgil has made them ; and of this he 
gives, as one instance 3 the line in the text. 


laMes of the diphthong are only dissolved, by 
which means the first foot becomes a Dactyl ; and 
the last syllable of the diphthong is absorbed in 
the first of c lonio.' The second foot is in its na- 
tural state and quantity, an Amphibrachys ° - °, 
and received in exchange for a Dactyl, of which it 
is a mere transposition. Of this line, therefore, 
the following is the correct mode of scanning : 

Insulaje Ioni|o in magjno quas | dira Ce|Iaeno. 

Other instances of the use of the Amphibrachys 
are the following, which, it is observable, are all 
rendered requisite from the necessity of introdu- 
cing the proper adjective ' lonius,' in its different 
cases, for which, of course, no substitute or ex- 
change could be found. 

loniioque ma ri Male'seque seiquacibus ] undis p . 
Nee potis | Ionilas fluc;tus aejquare selquendo^. 
Nosse quot | Ioni.i venijunt ad | litora ] fluctus r . 

But this is no objection, even though no in- 
stance in the case of a common word, but only in 
a proper name, or one derived from it, has been 
actually as yet found, because the admission of 
this foot is clearly within the musical principle so 
often referred to s . 

f Virgil, iEneid, lib. v. v. 198, 
s Virgil, iEneid, lib. iii. v. 671. 
'* Virgil, Georg. lib. ii. v. 108. 

8 Dionysius, a Greek poet, cited in Kirchner's Prosodia 
Graeca, p. 94', has, in v. 533, introduced the word Iwths, the 


Of the use of the Proceleusma, the instances 
are equally certain. It occurs plainly in the first 
foot of the following line : 

Ti&pCC [AcV 01 OOplK KSlTCtl, QCTCC $pVC£ CCKPOi (pSPOVTlZl. 

In the Westminster Greek Grammar, entitled 
' Institutio Grsecse Grammatices Compendiaria, in 
' usum Regise Scholar Westmonasteriensis,' edit, 
Lond. 1779, p. 154, it is true this line is given as 
an example of the rule there laid down, that, be- 
fore consonants, vowels and diphthongs are often 
rejected ; and, to favour this supposition, it is 
there also thus printed : 

' Ylctp piv ol co pia KcItoci, oar a opvog ccupa, (pipovTOii? 

But the first foot is a Proceleasma, by dissolving 
the diphthong oi ; the second a Dactyl, by ab- 
sorbing the syllable /, of the diphthong oi, in the 
first syllable of oopta, which is no Licence ; and the 
third foot is a Dactyl, by dissolving the diphthong 
in the last syllable of khtmi, and absorbing the 
letter i of that syllable in the first syllable of ova ; 
and this, again, is no Licence, because, from a 
multitude of examples which might be collected 
from Homer, it seems to have been the ordinary 
course of the Greek Prosodia. The above line 
ought, therefore, to be thus scanned : 

quantities of the syllables of which, decidedly justify the mode 
of scanning in the text. Dionysius's line is as follows : 

Tcl1<; d S7TJ J vwaoi \\acnv V\wtilai$ j hQa ts J Kccivgj* 


in consequence of which, it is a clear authority 
for the use of the Proceleusma u . Virgil has also 
introduced it in the following lines : 

Hasrent parietibus scalse postesque sub ipsos x . 
Parietibusque premunt arctis et quatuor addunt^. 

* ITapa consists of two short syllables, and is used as such in 
the following instance in Homer's Iliad, book A, v. 34 : 

u Homer, in his Iliad, book /3, v. 185, has given, in the 
following line, a decided instance of the use of the Proce- 

Avtgj | ^' 'ATps/ldsw Aya]jufju.vovof j avri'o<; J l\G«uv. 

It has been already remarked, that, in the case of an elision of 
a diphthong, it is a frequent practice with the Greeks, to retain 
one half of it, and not to suffer the whole to be absorbed. The 
case is the same with * and a; and, consequently, in the above 
line the » is to be considered as a long syllable, one half of 
which, being lost in the elision with the first syllable of Aya/xsjuvovof, 
there still remains the quantity o^ a short syllable belonging to 
the w, and unabsorbed, so as to render the foot a Proceleusma. 
x Virgil, i?Eneid, lib. ii. v. 442. Ruddiman, p. 147. * Vulgo 
' docent in versu Hexametro alios nonnunquam, praeter Dac- 
c tylum et Spondaeum, pedes reperiri, ut Proceleusmaticum in 

* hoc Virg. 

* Haerent parietibus scalse postesque sub ipsos, 

4 et Anapaestum in hoc ejusdern, 

' Fluviorum r«x Eridanus camposque per omnes. 

1 Verurn in his * Parietibus' quatuor syllabarum est, < Fluviorum' 

* trium, per synecphonesin, ut supra docuimus.' p. 140. Rud- 
diman, p. 147. 

y Virgil, Georg. lib. iv. v. 297* Ruddiman, p. 142, saye 


Genua labant gelido concrevit frigore sanguis 2 . 
Velleraque ut foliis depectant tenuia Seres a . 
iEdificant sectaque intexunt abiete custos b . 
Tenuia nee lanae per ccelum vellera ferri c . 

In the two first, the grammarians endeavour to 
evade the difficulty, by directing-, that ' Parietibus' 
should be read ' Parjetibus,' so as to produce a con- 
traction of two syllables into one, and make the 
first syllable in the word long by position. 

But, if the Proceleusma be considered as re- 
ceived instead of a Dactyl, of which it is merely 
a resolution, and it is certainly so received, no 
violation is necessary, The lines, therefore, should, 
in reality, be thus scanned ; 

Haerent | parietijbus sca|Ise posjtesque sub | ipsos. 
Parieti|bus que prejmunt arctis et | quatuor | addunt. 

Parietibus here is to be considered as a tetrasyllable, and be 
read Parjetibus. 

1 Virgil, iEn. lib. xii. v. 905. Ruddiman, p. 142, says, 
Genua is here to be considered as a dissyllable, and should be 
read Genva. Ralph Winterton, in his Observations on Hesiod, 
among the * Poetae Minores Graeci,' 12mo. Cantab. 1635, in a 
note on the 'Theogonia,' v. 850, speaks of this and the following 
verse from Virgil's ./Eneid, 1. v. 432: 

Genua labant vastos quatil eeger anhelitus artus, 

as two decided instances of the Proceleusma. 

a Virgil, Georg. lib. ii. v. 121. Ruddiman, p. 142, says, 
Tenuia here is to be considered as a trisyllable, and be read 

b Virgil, 2En, 1. ii. v. 16. Ruddiman, p. 142, says, Abiete 
here is to be considered as a trisyllable, and be read Abjete. 

c Virgil, Georg. lib. i. v. 395. 


Genua la|bant gelifdo con|crevit | frigore | sanguis. 
Vellerajque ut foli|is dejpectant | tenuia [ Seres, 
iEdifijcant secltaque in|texunt j abiete [ custos. 
Tenuia | nee la|nae per | coelum | vellera | ferri. 

Besides being thus admissible in other situa- 
tions of the verse, each of these feet, the Ana- 
paest, the Amphibrachys, and the Proceleusma, 
and the same may be said of the Dactyl also, 
may be as legitimately received in the sixth or 
last foot of an Heroic Hexameter verse, in ex- 
change for the Spondee. In general, this last foot 
is limited to the Spondee alone, but instances oc- 
cur in Homer, Virgil, and Horace, where the 
above sorts of feet are employed in the last foot of 
the verse, to supply the place of a Spondee, as 
the following examples will show : 

Dactyl : 

Troas | relliqui|as Dana|um atque imjmitis A[chlllei d . 
Pergama | relliqui|as Danajum atque im|mitis Alchlllei*. 
Nos mijranda qui|dem sed | nuper | consule | Junto f . 
Vilis a|mico|rum est anjnona bo|nis ubi j quid deest g . 
Inseriltur velro ex foe|tu nucis | arbutus { horrida h . 
Nee tan|tum Rhodo'pe mijrantur et | Ismarus | Orphei'* 

* Virgil, iEneid, lib. i. v. 30. 

e Virgil, iEneid, lib. iii. v. 87. 

f Juv. as cited by Ruddiman, p. 141. 

2 Horace, Epist. lib. i. Ep. xii. v. 24. Ruddiman, p. 141 . 

h Virgil, Georg. lib, ii. v. 69. Ruddiman, p. 147. 

1 Virgil, Bucol. Eclog. vi. v. 30. Ruddiman, p. 147* 


Anapaest : 

Proptere'a quia | corpus a'quae najturaque | tenuis** 
Cum te | flagranti deljectum | fulmine | Phaethon K 
Kotus a|mor Phaedree no|ta est injjuria | Thesel" 1 . 
Divitis | uber a|gri Troljanae opu|lentia | deerlt n . 

Amphibrachys : 

XosAniSflj I t\ EipSTpi\ccv rs 9 7ro\kvgci(pv\hov ff 'Icr\Ttoii<z}/ l \ 

Ruddiman, p. 147, endeavours to make an elision 
of the last syllable of each of the two last verses, 
in the first class above, with the first syllable of 
the next succeeding verse, in the original author, 
as that begins with a vowel ; but it is plain that 
could never have been intended as the foundation 
of the practice, because, among the above ex- 
amples, are some verses, which do notf end with 
a vowel, or the letter ?n, and where an elision is 
consequently impossible. Nor can they be justly 
considered as the consolidation of two vowels, be- 
cause the fourth does not terminate with a word 
capable of any such elision or contraction. 

b Lucretius, as cited by Ruddiman, p. 142. 

1 Varro, as cited by Ruddiman, edit. Edinb. 1756, p. 141. 

m Ovid, Fasti, lib. vi. v. 737. Ruddiman, p. 141. 

a Virgil, .-En. lib. vii. v. 262. Ruddiman, p. 14L 

Homer, Iliad, lib. fa v. 537, edit. Clarke. 



Iambic Metre, of what Feet that consists. 

Victorinus's opinion that there are three sorts of Iambic, viz.. 
Iambic, Trochaic, and a mixture of both. — Remarks on it. 
—Eight sorts of feet deducible from the Iambus and Spon- 
dee, the two fundamental feet of the Iambic. — What they 
are, stated. — Five of these already acknowledged by Gram- 
marians. — Trochee not admitted by them. — Victorinus, his 
opinion on that point. — Terentianus Maurus, his sentiments 
on that subject. — Amphibrachys not received by the Gram- 
marians — Nor Proceleusma. — An example of the Proce- 
leusma.— Trochee admissible, and no reason for excluding 
it. — Instances from iEschylus, Sophocles, and Juba. — Juba's 
opinion.— Amphibrachys and Proceleusma equally admis- 
sible. — Difficulty of finding, on any occasion, an actual ex- 
ample, even for a common fact. — But the fact, if reasonable 
in itself from principle, not therefore to be rejected. 

Victorinus, speaking of Iambic metre, says, it 
consisted of three sorts, Iambic, Trochaic, and a 
mixture of both p. This idea, wherever it was 
obtained, for he does not notice the principles of 
Music as his guide in it, most certainly approaches 

p * Sed ut jam ad conditionem Iambici Metri disciplinamque 
< redeamus, tres ejus species, per quas profluit, enitar attin- 
* gere, quarum prima Iambica, sequens Trochaica, tertia ex 
i utroque mixta reperitur.' — Victorinus, edit. Putsch, col. 2571- 


much nearer to the true and original state and sub- 
sequent practice of Poetry, than perhaps any other 
that can be produced from among the writings of 
the Latin grammarians. What he terms a mixture 
of both the Iambic and Trochaic was* no doubt, 
the Iambic in its earliest state, into which, in con- 
sequence of the musical principle, so often already 
necessarily referred to, the Trochee, the Spondee^ 
and all feet equal to either of those, might be 
received. The Iambic and Trochaic, as distin- 
guished from each other, were nothing but the 
two sorts formed out of the original, by a separa- 
tion in after-times. 

From the Iambus and the Spondee, the two 
fundamental feet of the Iambic, it is evident eight 
sorts of feet, including those two, may be pro- 

From the Iambus. From the Spondee. 

The Trochee - - The Dactyl 

The Tribrachys ...... » w The Anapsest 

The Amphibrachys . . 

The Proceleusma . . . 

\j \j 

SJ _ 

Of these several feet, five, the Iambus, Tri- 
brachys, Dactyl, Anapaest, and Spondee, are univer- 
sally allowed by all the grammarians, as admissible 
in Iambic * ; but they do not admit the Trochee % 

•» See Priscian ' De Versibus Coraicis,' edit. Putsch, col. 

r Victorinus, edit. Putsch, col. 2529. 


because they erroneously conceived that consti- 
tuted a different species s ; nor the Amphibra- 

s TerentianUs Maiirus, ediu Putsch. col* 2442. Priscian, 
edit. Putsch, col. 1321, from Juba, has inserted the following 
passage, in which he mentions the practice of introducing 
Trochees into the Iambic, though he ignorantly censures the 
custom: * Qui, ergo, confuderunt et multiformiter conjugaverunt 
i hoc genus versuum, omnibus vel locis indifFerenter posuerunt 

* Trochaeos, aut pro Spondeis, aut pro Dactylis ; et hsec est 
< quoque vitiosa confusio, ut 

" Siqua flagella jugabis, ante putare decetj 
*' Ne resoluta et vidua ulmus et cornus 
u Agri dissidium dare Nysia rura queant." 

Juba has certainly misunderstood the reason for admitting the 
Trochee, when he says it was received instead of the Spondee 
Or Dactyl ; for it is evident it is instead of the Iambus. The 
musical principle, so often mentioned, is certainly a sufficient 
reason for contending that all feet, equal in value, are admis- 
sible, and the Trochee with the rest ; and this principle is so 
reasonable, that it is unnecessary to inquire whether the verses 
mentioned by Juba are, or not, properly considered as Iambic. 
Priscian, edit. Putsch, col. 1328, says, < ^Eschylus in Evta. ett< 

" Hv to J ^.eo&v'to? <7t) I jua. xa< j jxiyaj j Tt/Vo?.* 

* In principio enim Trochaeum posuit. Quern imitans Sophocles> 
4 teste Seleuco, profert quaedam contra legem metrorum, sicut 

* in hoc : 

' AX(?>r|cr<bo/|ay ty | 6 <y-.v\v%crx$ j TaTr,p. ' 

' Hie quoque Iambus a Trochaeo incipit.' If Priscian is right 
in calling the former of these lines Iambic, there is also a Tro- 
chee in the fifth place; for the line must be scanned thus: 

Hy to J fjLsdov\TOi a-rj\jjL(x us\ya$ Tujaroj. 

Of the three lines given by Priscian above, the first is & 
Trochaic Trimeter catalectic ; the second an Iambic or Trochaic 
Trimeter acatalectic ; and the third, an Iambic or Trochaic Tri- 



rfiys or Proceleusma,, because they had not found 
an actual instance fr * 

Terentianus Maurus, as Victorinus remarks", 
lias stated that, in the second foot of a Trochaic 
Terse, an Iambus might be introduced, though 
Victorinus also observes, that the very same au- 
thor, Terentianus Maurus, had excluded the Tro- 
ehee from the Iambic \ This inconsistency evi- 

meter acataleetie ; but in this last, ' dare* must be read ' dari, 7 
to make it the necessary metre ; and, in every one of them, the 
Iambus and Trochee are intermixed. Other instances of this 
intermixture have been already mentioned, 

1 Victorinus, however, seems to admit the fact of the actual 
occurrence of the Proceleusma, which he endeavours to avoid 
by a Poetical Licence; for he says, edit. Putsch, col. 2572, 

* Sane accidit nonnunquam, ut pro Anapsesto, aut Dactyls, 
6 aut Spondeo, quatuor breves primo pede ponantur, tanquam, 

* Beneficia pro re col ere sapientis viri est,- 

* qui, aut per synaloephen scanditur, aut duobus brevibus in 

* unam longam eopulatis explicatur;' but he is evidently de- 
ceived in supposing a Licence necessary, and in confining its in- 
troduction to the first foot only. 

u Victorinus, edit. Putsch, col. 2529. See also Terentianus 
Maurus, edit. Putsch, col. 2432. The passage in Victorinus is 
as follows ; * Troehaicum metrum eosdem pedes quos et lam- 

* bicum recipere manifestum est, eadera enim utriusque pro- 

* genies est, excepto dumtaxat Iambo, simili inter se contra- 

* rietatis ratione, qua et Trcchaei in Iambo excluduntur. Quan« 

* quam Terentianus, non pcenitendus inter cseteros artis metrical 
& auctor, sedulo refragetur. Nam secundam sedem in Trochaico 
5 versu Trimetro acatalecio, velut legitimam Iambo assignat, 

* cum idem ab Iambico metro Trochseum excluserit.* — Victo- 
rinus, inter Grammat. Lat. Auctores, a Putschio, col. 2529. 

3 Ibid. col. 2529. The lines in Terentianus Maurus are 

' Quid ? non Trochaeus terapoFum est aeque U'iuHi ? 
5 Est : sect 'jCrochseo longa prior syllaba> 


dently arose from his writing from examples only, 
and not from principle. No reason could exist 
for excluding the Trochee from any situation in 
the Iambic, in its original general state ; and his 
acknowledgment that the Iambus might occur in 
a Trochaic verse, is a plain confession that the 
Iambic and Trochaic are in fact the same ? . That 
they were so originally, cannot be doubted ; be- 
cause they both spring from the same musical 
principle, of One to Two, or Duple Proportion; 
and what advantage may be derived from sepa- 
rating them, is a point which remains to be 
proved ; but does not concern the present inquiry, 
relating as it does to Poetry in its early and ori- 
ginal state. 

By the authority of Terentianus Maurus, who 
admits the Iambus into the Trochaic, and conse- 
quently recognises the reasonableness of the same 
practice as to the Trochee in the Iambic ; by the 
instances from Euripides and Sophocles above re- 
ferred to ; and by the considerations just stated, 
it is conceived that the use of the Trochee, one of 
the three less customary feet in Iambic, may be 

' Brevis auteni lambo, tonga post, cui non potest 

* Longam Trooliaeus subdere, et ire vein suara 
' Brevi sequentis, qua fit hoc Iambicum : 

* En cur lambo non Trochseus serviat, 

* Qui raetron ipse copulat Trochaicum, 

* Prffibetque nomeo, ut loquemur postmodum.* 

y Both Etuapides and Sophocles have introduced the Tro- 
chee into an Iambic verse. See the instances from each in a 
preceding note. 


justified ; and, although no actual instances of the 
Amphibrachys and Proceleusma, the other two 
remaining feet of those three, have been given, 
or as yet found, except, indeed, that of this last 
produced by Victorinus, inserted in a former note, 
it seems highly irrational to suppose that, when 
the principle in them all was the same, and some 
had been admitted, the rest, without any reason, 
for none can be suggested, should have been ex- 
eluded from insertion. 

None but those who have tried it, can be in 
any degree aware of the extreme difficulty of find- 
ing, when it is wanted, an actual example to jus- 
tify a rule universally acknowledged, and which 
no man of sense would ever think of questioning. 
Of this difficulty. Dr. Carey, of Islington, has 
given a remarkable instance z , which may serve to 
icheck the presumption of those who think nothing 
allowable but what they can find to have been 
really practised. Many things may be lawfully 
done by a man, which yet he may never have oc- 

% At the end of a note, on the Advertisement to his ' Latin 

* Prosody made easy, abridged for the Use of Schools,' edit. 
12mo. Lond. 1809, speaking of his * Latin Prosody made easy,' 
the original work, he says* i I will here only add, that, after its 

* publication, I found among my papers a memorandum which 

* had escaped my notice at the time of writing that preface, 
« viz. that I had, with the assistance of the Dauphin Index, ex- 

* amined one hundred and forty-three passages of Virgil, for a 
' verse, to prove the quantity of the nominative AS of the 
4 first declension, without finding a single one to my purpose.— 
4 It was time to desist.' 


casion to do, in the whole course of his life ; and 
his forbearing to use that power, is no evidence of 
his not possessing the right, unless coupled with 
some substantial reason why he ought to have 
used it, or why he could not have possessed it. 
Homer or Virgil might each, if they had so pleas- 
ed, have begun their poems of the Iliad and Odys- 
sey, and the ^Eneid, with other words, than they 
have chosen, because there is no reason why they 
should have been limited to those they have used : 
and, as it was optional with them how they would 
begin, their having preferred the present mode, is 
no argument to prove they might not, had they 
chosen it, have begun or expressed themselves in 
any other maimer which they had thought fit. 

The inability, therefore, to produce an actual 
example, even admitting, which is not believed to 
be the case in the present instance, that no such 
example does in fact exist, is no evidence that 
such a measure as that which it is wanted to 
justify was unlawful, unless it can be shown, in 
addition, why it was unlawful. The necessity for 
using such a step might, perhaps, have never oc- 
curred ; but the mere circumstance of its not 
having been used, is no proof that, had such 
necessity occurred, that mode would have been 
rejected. On every ground, therefore, that can 
be suggested, the most reasonable conclusion 
certainly is, that, as all rested on the same 
foundation, and some are known to have been 

k 3 


used, the rest, including all that could in any way 
be produced from the Iambus or the Spondee, 
might have been lawfully also, and probably were> 
employed in like manner, whenever the Poets 
needed their assistance. 


Bacchiac or Pceonlc 31etre, what Feet it admits. 

Pasonk erroneously divided into three sorts, Paeonie, Bacchiac^ 
andCretio. — For this division Poetical Licences unnecessarily 
introduced, even by Bentley. — Paeonie supposed by some 
invented by Aristophanes. — Used by Cratinus and Archilo- 
chus. — Hephaestion's opinion as to Paeonie. —It admits, as 
appears from specimens given by Bentley, feet of six times, 
as well as those of five. — Enumeration of feet admissible* 

Phonic metre has been usually, though errone- 
ously, divided by the Grammarians into three 
distinct sorts ; Pseonic, as consisting of the Pseons ; 
Bacchiac, and Cretic ; and these they have endea- 
voured to keep separate, though, in fact, they are 
all but one and the same a . The consequence of 

a Diomedes, edit. Putsch, col. 506, speaking of Paeonie 
Metre, says, * Pasonicum Metrum quod plerique Rhythmicum 
4 esse dixerunt, constat priore Paeone. Admittit vero et quar- 

* turn, Creticum, et Bacchium, a brevi qui est ; a Dimetri hoc 
4 enparabase Aristophanes eomposuisse creditur.' — Forfcunatia- 
nus, edit. Putsch, col. 2679, says, De Paeonico Metro, ' Paeo- 

* nicus versus quadratus, ab Aristophane comico compositus est.' 
—From these two passages it should seem these authors thought 
it invented by him. But Plotius, edit. Putsch, col. 2661, speaks 
of it as used by Cratinus, who lived about 4-53 years before our 
Saviour (Saxii Onomast. vol. i. p. 35); whereas Aristophanes 
did not flourish earlier than between 4*22 and 418 years before 
Christ. It has, however, been already shown, in Section VI, 
that it was used by Archilochus long before, 

K 4 


this conduct has been the necessary introduction 
of Poetical Licences, without which they could 
not be kept asunder b ; a circumstance sufficient in 
itself to show there was no real difference between 
them. Springing, as they all do, from one and 
the same musical proportion of Three to Two, 
which, as has been noticed before, is termed Ses- 
quialteral, it is evident they cannot be correctly 
considered as distinct sorts. They will, therefore, 
here be deemed as of one kind, and treated of 
under the general name of Pseonic, as more usual, 
though, in fact, it seems that this kind of verse 
was first employed in the hymns to Bacchus ', and 
that the Bacchius was the foundation, in exchange 
for which, the rest of the feet were occasionally 

Hephsestion describes the Pseonic as being of 
three sorts, the Cretic, the Bacchiac, and the Pa^ 
limbacchiac ; and says, that it receives the reso- 
lutions called the Paeons (1 . In another place he 

b Bentley, in his \ Emendationes ad Ciceronis Tusculanas,' 
inserted at the end of * Ciceronis Tusculanarum Disputationum 
' Libri V. ex recensione Joannis Davisii, Coll. Regin. Cantab. 
* Socii,' 8vo. Cantab, 1709, p. 49, before referred to, has 
given some verses from Plautus and Terence. Of these, . 
some he supposes Cretic and some Bacchiac ; and he has ac- 
cordingly kept the two sorts separate, although, to prevent 
their intermixture, he has been obliged to imagine Licences in- 
troduced, which do not really exist. See the lines themselves, 
apd the. observations given on them in Section XXV. infra. 

c See Sect. VI. 

' To o\ ity.iOovi.KOV} udri ( \yjn Tp/a, to, ts x^tikov, -k%\ t'j /Sawc? 
yiict.-A.ay 9 kcci to sraX/wbcoc^Eia/.ov, o xaj kvi'7riir,dnov Ifi wpoj ^eAotojVxvj 


notices that, by the resolution of the long syllables 
of the Cretic, five short syllables may be received. 
Of these different sorts he has given specimens^ 
and, amongst the rest, one where all the feet but 
the last consist of five short syllables, and that last 
is one of the Paeons e . But the instances of Bac- 
chiac and Cretic verse which Bentley has given 
from Plautus and Terence, in his c Emendationes 
' ad Giceronis Tusculanas/ before referred to, and 
which will be found here inserted in Section XXV, 
infra, have ascertained that, besides the above- 
mentioned feet, which are each equal to five short 
syllables, these verses also admitted the Molossus, 

' to as jtprjTOtov. sirirvo^tov' oB^sroci as kcci Xvcniq Taj e/j raj KOiXnusvag 

* vouina** Hephaestion, a Pauw, 4to. Traject. ad Rhenum, 

1726, p. 41, — '£? as 7ro!r,[, tTiTrictivcri crvvQuvoa, w 5 -£ a^ifoTEpaj t«5 

* s>t«Tspw&Ey ra xpnTi/.S y.x.Kfus \vjug rwv sx tts'vts fipuxHuv TrapaXa^,- 

* ba'vsiy, kXw Taj T£/\.£VTa/aj, £<£>' r,j Toy TEVapTov TrapaXa/jtbayEi Kcci'wa.J 

Ibid p. 43. 

e Victorinus, edit. Putsch, col. 2544, speaking of the 
Paeonic, says, that the verses either consist of the Paeons of 
fwe times, of the Bacchius of five times, or the Cretic of five 
times, after which, he says, c Ubi enim non pedum sed nume- 

* rorum ratio subsistit, non pedes pedibus pares restituuntur, 

* sed tempora temporibus adaequantur. Quidam trisyllabis et 
' tetrasyllabis admixtis pedibus hoc genus versuum et composu- 

* erunt, et indifferenter ista compositione usi sunt. Nam aut 

* Creticis, aut eorum solutionibus, id est, Paeonibus aut primo 
"aut quarto indifferenjter mixtis, carmen ediderunt; sed et 

* Bacchiacis et Creticis conjugationibus adasque usi sunt. — Unde 
' datur intelligi eundem pedem, per solutionem Cretici et 
1 Bacchii, conmiunem esse utriusque, cui par similisque hie 
4 Rhythmus, qui ex quinque continuis brevibus syllabis con- 

* stat. Est enim totidem temporum quot et Paeon pes et Bac- 
■ chius et Amphimacrus,' 



Choriambus, Bi-Trochee, and other feet equiva- 
lent to six short syllables p . On the musical prin- 
ciple before noticed and explained, by which all 
equivalent quantities might be introduced, it is 
reasonable, therefore, to conclude, that all the 
above-mentioned feet, as well those equal to six, 
as those equivalent only to five short syllables, 
were received, together with all such, as by the 
change of one long for two short, or of two short 
for one long syllable, could be produced from 
those feet. In consequence of these facts, the fol- 
lowing will be the several sorts of feet admissible : 

Antibacchius .... 

Paeon 1 



Paeon 2. 

Paeon 3 

Paeon 4 

Tribrachys and 

<J — <J v/ 

<-> — V 

f" \J \J V \J V 


lonicus Major ... 



Trochee and Tri- 

Iambus and Tro 
chee, or Anti 
spast ....... 


Iambus and Tri- 

lonicus Minor ... 



_ v» w „ 

\J \J \J \J 

V — _ w 

m. \J \J \J 

Anapaest and Pyr-7 
rhichius j" 

Tribrachys and 
Trochee ., 

Tribrachys and 

I , u u 


f Bentley, in his dissertation c De Metris Comicis,' prefixed 
to his Terence, notices, p. 1, that Bacehiac and Cretic verses 
are to be scanned by single feet. 



Origin of Comedy and Tragedy. 

Kites of Bacchus made Poetry familiar to the common people, 
— Keepers of Cattle wanted employment for their faculties. 
— Betook themselves to Poetry. — Terpander first set words 
to Music. — Dialogue invented by Alexamenes Teius. — 
Competitions in verse encouraged at sheep-shearing feasts* 
—Poems, why so called. — Contests of this kind exhibited in. 
public, on other occasions. — Comedy arose from these. — 
Theatrical productions, how exhibited originally. — At first 
one actor only. — A second introduced. — The number in- 
creased still further. — Comedy not originally sung through 
the streets. — Susarion, the first who furnished poetical per- 
formances to the people at large. — What they probably 
were — Comedy originally a Chorus of Singers, without ac- 
tors. — Plot for Comedy, and Dress for the actor, when and 
by whom introduced. — Comedy, when first so called. — Ety^ 
mology and reason of the name. — Tragedy not then invent- 
ed. — Improvements in Comedy by Epicharmus and Phormis. 
—Comedy, at this time, no more than a Chorus of Singers 
and Musical Performers. — The same with that which flou- 
rished in the first age of Comedy at Athens. — Improvements 
under Pericles. — Brought to perfection by Eupolis and Ari^ 
stophanes. — Comedy, in the two first ages, called the Old.— 
Its characteristics. — Athens taken by Lysander.— Comedy 
restricted.— Third age of Comedy — Styled the Middle Co» 
medy. — -Its peculiarities. — Further restrictions on it in the 
time of Alexander. — Fourth age of Comedy— Called the 
New Comedy. — Its characteristics.--The Komans only copied 
the New, — Livius Andronicus first introduced Comedy at 


Rome. — Characteristics of the four different ages of Ce<» 
medy more distinctly stated.— Origin of Tragedy. — Co- 
medy the earlier of the two.— Etymology of the name Tra- 

r rom the composition of Poems, Songs, and Hymns, 
in honour of Bacchus, and the introduction of 
these and other pieces of Poetry into his rites ^ at 
the celebration of which, as a religious festival., 
the common people were at least present ; one very 
natural consequence was seen to arise. It not 
only tended to render Poetry more familiar to 
them, and to excite in them a taste for it, as an 
accompaniment to festivity ; but it also, at the same 
time, furnished to those, whose occupation left 
the mind vacant, and in want of some object to 
employ its faculties, the opportunity and induce- 
ment to endeavour at imitation, in the production 
of compositions in verse, on subjects better suited 
to their own taste and condition. No occupation 
seems to require less of intellect, than that of a 
keeper of cattle ; and, from the leisure which 
these persons experienced in the continual exer- 
cise of their daily profession, those who earliest 
applied themselves to the practice and cultivation 
of Lyric Poetry, appear to have been, in fact, 
Shepherds and Herdsmen. 

Among all nations, and in all countries, tending 
sheep seems to have been, as from its nature and 
necessity it was likely it should, one of the most 

s See Section VI. 


ancient occupations. But, confining those em- 
ployed in it to one spot, and yet affording them no 
exercise for the faculties of the mind, it could not 
fail of being tedious and irksome to all those on 
whom Nature had bestowed any considerable por- 
tion of intellect. To beguile the time, and lessen 
the fatigue of Indolence, which is frequently more 
oppressive than that arising from hard labour, 
these persons resorted to the practice of singing, 
or playing on the pipe, such melodies as they had 
learnt. As a voluntary task, they set themselves 
to compose words in verse to those melodies, in 
order that, in turn, these new words might be 
sung as Songs ; and frequent practice in this kind 
of composition, without any object to distract 
their attention, soon rendered them in this, as it 
was naturally to be expected it should, extremely 
expert K 

* * Caeterum Clemens Alexandrinus, Stromat. «. de Ter- 
' pandro, " MsXog " srpwTos," inquit, " vripiiQviKZ roig 'Kowy.a.cri, kccI th; 

* ActKtdoufjLOvi'wv f'^fAoTroiVKTE Tspirocv^fog o 'Avna-<xa?6s, quod 

* Hervetus vertit, " Modos Poematibus primus adjecit et Lace- 
' daemoniorum leges numerosis versibus scripsit.'' — Prideaux, 
1 Marmora Oxoniensia/ among * Notae Historieae ad Chronicon 
< Marmoreum/ p. 199. From the Chronicle itself, p. 166, it ap- 
pears that Terpander flourished 381 years before that Chronicle 
was written, which last event happened 91 years after the birth 
of Alexander. See the Chronicle itself, ibid. p. 173. Terpander 
lived 567 years before Christ. Prideaux, ' Marmora, Redin- 

* tegratae Annotat.' p. 44. Moses was born 1576 before Christ, 
see Helvici Chron. p. 20; and David began to reigu 1059 be- 
fore Christ, Helvici Chronol. p. 40 ; so that Terpander w'as 
about 492 years subsequent to David, and about 919 posterior 
to Moses. 


If two flocks of sheep happened by accident 
usually to feed near each other, whether they were 
kept, as might perhaps also be the case, by rela- 
tions or friends, or by those who before had been 
total strangers to each other, it was highly na- 
tural that the two Shepherds, to dispel their mu- 
tual gloom, and relieve themselves from the bur- 
den of solitude, should enter into conversation : 
and, if either or both of these possessed, as, per- 
haps, they frequently did, some talent for Poetry, 
it was equally to be expected, that they should 
stimulate the Invention and Genius of each other, 
by the composition of alternate stanzas, or speeches 
in verse K This accounts for the introduction of 
Dialogue into Pastoral Poetry ; and, on similar 
models, the Idyls of Theocritus and the Bucolics 
of Virgil have been formed. 

Competitions of this kind, affording, as they 
did, considerable scope for Invention, were capable, 
no doubt, of being rendered, by those of adequate 
talent and promptness to support the contest, 
sources of gratification and entertainment to such 
of their auditors as perhaps had neither inclination 
nor skill to carry them on themselves. For this 
reason, no doubt, the practice was promoted and 
encouraged among the Shepherds at their meet- 

1 Scaliger, De Poetice, lib. i. cap. 3, says, * Dialog], au- 
* tem, inventor videtur Alexamenes Teios ;' but who be was, 
or when he flourished, he has not mentioned, or on what evi- 
dence he founded his opinion. 


ings, sheep-shearings, feasts, and other opportu- 
nities of assembling together ; and, as additional 
inducements, rewards were proposed for those 
competitors, who, in the judgment of the rest, 
should excel and distinguish themselves in this 
literary contention. By these means, and for these 
reasons, such compositions seem, in after-times, to 
have been rendered an essential and indispensable 
part of the entertainment of the company as- 
sembled, and to have obtained so great a degree 
of celebrity, as to require that a new and pecu- 
liar name should be given to them. Their sub- 
jects were too various and indefinite to admit of 
their being characterized by any appellation refer- 
ring to them ; but the circumstance of their ori- 
ginal introduction by Shepherds, was found to 
suggest a fit and adequate description k . They 

k Although the original ascribed to Pastoral Poetry in the 
text has very strong probability for its support, it is still also 
necessary to mention some other facts, from which the appella- 
lion might possibly have been derived. Josephus, in his Answer 
to Appian, lib. i. cap. 3, notices that the Jews were, in Egypt, 
originally termed the Shepherds. This was, no doubt, in. con- 
sequence of the account which Joseph directed his brethren to 
give of themselves, when they should be introduced to Pha- 
raoh, by saying they were Shepherds. See Genetis, xlvi. 32 
and 34. Linus is said to have carried learning from Phoenicia 
into Greece. See Sect. IV. above. Phoenicia is the land of 
Canaan, Selden De Diis Syris, p. 16; and the poetical compo- 
sitions of the Jews, such as those of Moses and David, &c. in 
all kinds, were certainly anterior to every one of a similar nature 
by the Greeks. See Sect. II. above. It is far from improbable, 
therefore, that the Greeks, in reference to their origin, might 


were therefore denominated Poems, a name derive 
ed from ITo/p/v, Pastor 1 , a Shepherd, and aor/4^ 
Canticum m ; and formed, probably, by taking the 
first syllable of the first, and the whole of the 
last word, and which, when thus compounded;; 
produced Uoia^jjioc, easily corrupted to Ylor^a, I} * 
Or the last word might be H^a, from b^oci^ mitto> 
which, though rendered by Schrevelius c Telum 
e missile V might equally imply any thing sent, and-* 
therefore, by no means improperly, any production 
or poetical composition p. Or it might be a sub- 
stantivej formed by rejecting the letter o-, from the 
perfect tense yjo-puiy of the verb H$op&i, detector i ; 
as any of these words give a competent sense: 
and, certainly, it might have been used without 

have characterized Poems by the appellation of the Songs of the 
Shepherds, in allusion to the Songs of the Israelites, or Shep- 
herds, the inhabitants of the land of Canaan, 

1 Schrevelii Lexicon, art. Iloipjy. 

m Ibid. art. Ac-p. 

n Scaliger, De Poetice, lib. i. cap. 4, says, < A genere ? 
s autem, pastionum sortita sunt nomina, ac, quanquam itoipw 
* omnem comprehendit custodiam, vrapa to tv ttoi« ^mv f tamen 
< Opilionibus solis attributum maluere ; unde et Trot^rwKa, ii can- 
' tus, quibus ill i sese atque alios oblectarunt.' The passage in 
the text was written some time before that in Scaliger had been 
seen ; and the coincidence of opinion, as to the origin of the 
term Poem, is therefore fortuitous* 

° Schrevelii Lexicon, art. H/uta. 

p The substantive, Ejaculation, in our own language, is an 
instance in point, which, though derived from the Latin, Eja- 
culor, to throw or shoot out, means a short prayer darted out 
occasionally. See Johnson's Diet. 

^ Schrevelii Lexicon, art* Ho-jxa*. 


the censure of too great violence; for the rejection 
of the o- is no greater an effort than has been fre- 
quently practised and allowed between the spelling 
and pronunciation in the French language. 

The popularity of this kind of compositions, and 
the attachment shown to them, when produced at 
these feasts, which, of course, did not often hap- 
pen, because the feasts themselves but rarely oc- 
curred, induced some persons to think that more 
frequent repetitions of such compositions, not con- 
fined merely to shepherds, or those who were pre- 
sent at this sort of feasts, but extended to the 
people at large, nor limited to the time of sheep- 
shearing, but performed occasionally, whenever 
opportunity offered, would equally prove a source 
of gratification to the audience, and of emolu- 
ment to the performers themselves. With this 
view, some of these associated together ; but, 
travelling about from place to place in a wag- 
gon, without having any established place for per- 
formance, they had no other alternative, than to 
sing, as they did, from the waggon in which they 
travelled r , a great variety of Songs and other vocal 
compositions. Of what species these were, is no 
where distinctly ascertained ; but, from a compo- 
sition of Susarion, still existing, which is supposed 

* Horace, in the following lines, De Arte Poetica, v. 275, 
expressly says that they did so as to Tragedy : 

* Ignotum Tragicoe genus invenisse Camoenae 

* Dicitur, et plaustris vexisse poemata, Thespis, 

* Quae canerent, agerentque, peruncti faecibus ora.' 




to have been one of them, and consists of a satire 
on Women, comprised in four Iambic Greek 
verses s , it is probable they were sometimes single 
Songs; sometimes, in reference to their original 
form, as since exhibited by Theocritus and Virgil, 
they were, perhaps, Dialogues; and at others their 
subjects were as various as the temper, genius, 
and talents of their authors. 

A very small transition was requisite, to con- 
vert compositions like those above mentioned, al- 
ready in dialogue, and recited by different persons, 
into something like Comedy; and, if a poet of 
humour could meet with an arch tale for his found- 
ation or plot, and could furnish it out with suit- 
able speeches to be uttered by different persons, 
each sustaining some separate character, and re- 
presenting one of the persons engaged in the ori- 
ginal conduct of the events there represented, it 
is not to be doubted, that such a performance 
could not fail of abundantly pleasing the multi- 
tude ; and that it clearly gives no indistinct idea 
of a dramatic composition, or Comedy. 

Theatrical productions, exhibited on the re- 
gular stage of a theatre, even at a period subse- 
quent to this now spoken of, were not, however, 
always conducted in the same manner ; nor is 
there any reason to think that, originally, they 
were represented by different actors. On the con- 
trary, the fact seems to have been, that at first 

s Stobcei Sentential a Gesner, fo. Tiguri, 1543, fo. 389, h. 


the whole was represented by one person, and that 
the performance was broken into different acts, to 
give him time for necessary rest, in order to pre- 
vent any ill consequences from fatigue or over-ex- 
ertion which might render him unable to proceed. 
In this state of the Drama, the sole actor, if he 
may be so called, was only a relator to the au- 
dience of the several events ; and this mode seems 
much to resemble the recital of Epic Poems at 
feasts, by the Poets themselves. But to relieve 
this one actor, and to break the length of his nar- 
rative, a second actor was afterwards introduced f , 
to whom, and not to the audience, the principal 
performer told his tale ; and which second actor, 
by asking questions for more information, and ex- 
pressing his own sentiments and feelings on what 

1 Aristotle, De Poetica, sect. iv. speaking of Tragedy, 
which he erroneously considers of earlier original than Comedy, 
says, ' Ka< to, te rwv vroy.fxiruiv wX^'Oos sf Ivoj e<j &vo Trpwroj A/c-p^vAos 

* fl'yay?.'— ' Primus numerum histrionum auxit iEschylus pro 

* uno duobus adhibitis.' Aristotle, De Poetica, edit. 8vo. 
Oxon. 1760, p. 7 & 58. The same author, speaking of Comedy, 
sect, v. says, it is uncertain who settled the number of actors. 
It is clear this writer is mistaken in ascribing to Tragedy an 
earlier date than Comedy. Whatever might be the object pf 
the Drama, when introduced, and established, the steps which 
he has stated are the necessary degrees to its previous recep- 
tion and improvement as a Drama, and are, therefore, equally 
applicable to Tragedy and Comedy* — ' Cratinus histriones in- 
f duxit, et Comcediam in actus distribuit.' * Notae Historicae ad 

* Chronicon Marmoreum,' « Prideaux, Marmora Oxoniensia,' 
1676, p. 204?, on the authority of the Prolegomena to Aristo? 

L 2 


he had heard related, broke the uniformity and 
tediousness of a long recital. The good success 
of this step was an inducement to the further ex- 
tension of the number of actors, and to the in- 
crease of their importance, by giving them a 
greater share in the conduct of the plot ; a prac- 
tice, since that time, invariably followed in all 
subsequent dramatic compositions. 

As well from evidence, as Reason, the above 
seems to have been the real and unexaggerated 
state of the case, with respect to the rise and ori- 
gin of Comedy ; and it appears still the more ra- 
tional and probable, because its transitions are so 
gradual and free from violence. Those who talk 
of Comedy in the general and lax manner, as 
having been sung through the streets of the towns 
in Attica u , and as exhibited by performers in a 
waggon x , have been evidently contented with a 
very inadequate ground and foundation for their 
assertions and opinions. They have ascribed ef- 
fects to inadequate causes, and have stated, as 
the result of certain facts, consequences which 
could never have followed, since it is plain, that, 
at the time when, according to their own account, 
these Songs and exhibitions prevailed, the subject 
represented had not only, neither in matter nor 

u * Notag Historicae ad Chronicon Marmoreum. Prideaux, 
1 Marmora Oxoniensia', p. 203, on the authority of Donatus, ' in 
* Prolegomenis ad Terentium/ and the Scholiast on Aristo- 
phanes, * in Prolegomenis ad Aristophanem/ 

* See a former note. 


form, assumed the characteristic distinction neces- 
sary to entitle it to the appellation of Comedy, but 
that several subsequent steps were still previously 
requisite, to give it any decided or peculiar desig- 
nation whatever. 

Susarion was the first person who undertook.* 
at Athens, to furnish such performances in public 
to the people at large > ; and he flourished between 
the 54th and 55th Olympiad, about 556 years be- 
fore our Saviour z . He seems to have done little 
more than improve upon the former compositions^ 
by, perhaps, writing better Songs, setting them to 
better melodies, and getting them sung by more 
musical voices and more skilful singers. Four 
lines by Susarion, as has been already noticed, 
are given by Stobaeus, and also with the ad- 
dition of a fifth in Bentley's Dissertation upon 
Phalaris, edit. 1777, p. 144. They have been very 
erroneously styled Comedy ; but Bentley, p. 146, 
has, because they are spoken in the person of the 
poet Susarion, which, as he says, will go a great 
way towards a proof that they are no part of a 
play, very justly censured the impropriety of the 
term as applied. Comedy, though in this state it 
does not deserve to be so called, it is certain was 
originally extremely rude, and consisted only of 
a Chorus or company of Singers, without any ac- 

y Diomedes, Gram. lib. iii. Scholiastes Aristoph. Cle* 
mens, Strom, lib. i. cited by Prideaux, p. 204s 
* Saxii Onomast. vol. i. p. 23* 

h 3 



tors a . It had neither scenery nor plot, but merely 
related, in verses set to music, the transactions, 
failings, and follies of the inhabitants of the place, 
openly, at the same time, disclosing to all, the 
names of the persons themselves intended to be 
censured b . A fictitious plot for Comedy, together 
with a long robe, as a dress for the actor, which 
reached down to his heels, was first introduced on 
the stage by Epicharmus and Phormis, both na- 
tives of Sicily, and contemporaries, who flourished 
when Gelon and Hieron reigned in Syracuse c . In 
this latter country, and about that period, this 
kind of Drama, in reference to its origin, first re- 
ceived the appellation of Comedy, because, as it 
is there said, it had formerly been sung through 
the streets of the several towns in Attica d . The 
reason assigned is by no means satisfactory in it* 
self, since the same might be said of all Songs ; 
and these were no more than Songs, without any 
resemblance of Comedy, as it is even here describ- 
ed. And if its name had been derived from the above 
supposed circumstance, this kind of composition 
might, with equal ground, have been so termed at 

a Notae Histories, Prideaux, p. 204. 

b Ibid. p. 204. 

s Gelon, the son of Dinomenes, reigned in Syracuse 215 
years before the writing of the Parian Chronicle; that is to 
say, 507 years before Christ. Prideaux, Marmora Oxoniensia, 
p. 170 (Parian Chron. Ep. 54), Annotationes, p. 62. 

d Ibid. p. 204. Schrevelius, in his Lexicon, art. Kv^m, 
says, * KufjM^x, Comcedia, et Kw/jtw^o?, Comoedus, quia h* tov; 
« kuuxc <x$ii, per vicos canit, ex k^d pagus, et «oj» cano/ 


first, and not have waited, as it did, till this change, 
before it received a determinate, definite, and pe- 
culiar appellation. But the fact seems to have 
been, that it obtained its name from the change 
by which it had acquired, what it had not before, 
a decisive and distinct characteristic ; and that^ as 
by the peculiar Dress of the performers a degree 
of Ornament or Decoration had been bestowed on 
it, to which no other species of performance could 
lay claim, the name was intended to point out that 
as its characteristic distinction from any thing else. 
The probable etymology of the name Comedy, 
which has, however, been derived by some per- 
sons from other very corrupt sources, strongly 
leads to the conclusion, that the above was the 
reason on which the appellation was founded ; for 
there is every ground to believe, from the proximity 
of the original words in sound, spelling, and 
Sense, to the latter term, that Comedy was, in 
reality, formed from two Greek words, Ko^og, 
which signifies Ornatus, or Dress and Ornament e , 

e Schrevelii Lexicon, art. Ko^o?. Aristotle, De Poetica, 
cap. vi. speaking of Tragedy, says, ' Eth* $s irgonrovrtq votSnut 

* Tm [AtpricriVi tjvwtov (jlev If avctyxris uv siri r* juo^joy rpscywdiag o tt?£ 

* o^iv$ KQ<r[A.o$j urcc jtAEXoTToiia kooi Xsft?. h T«Toif yap TroiSvra/ fni 
4 plprw* — * Quoniam vero Agentes instituimt imitationem, ne- 
1 cesse est ut ornatus eorum, quae visui exhibenda sunt, pars 

* aliqua sit Tragcediae; deinde Modulatio et Dictio, his enini 

* imitationem instituunt. , — In a note on the word sunt of the 
above Latin passage, it is said, * Seu apparatus.' Aristot. De 
iVetica, Oxon. 1760, p. 9 & 61. It is not intended here to> 

L 4 



and n$/i, a Poem ; and meant, as it is imagined, 
When thus united, a Poem or Composition sung 
by persons in the peculiar Dress above mentioned. 
Or it might be derived from Kop&og, Nodus f , and 
flJfy, a Poem » ; and, consequently, signify a poem, 
in which there was an intricacy and perplexity of 
plot, which is also one characteristic of Comedy, 
and was at that time peculiar to that, as Tragedy 
was not then invented h . 

consider how far, in such a performance, Music can be said to 
contribute to the Imitation or Resemblance of any thing. Aris- 
totle certainly entertained some strange notions on that subject; 
but the above passage is cited, for the purpose of showing that 
he thought the Dress of the Characters an essential part of 
Dramatic Representations. It was in this particular that they 
ditfered from other sorts of Poetry. 
f Schrevelii Lexicon, art. Ko/xSW 
f Ibid. art. Slh. 

h Many other etymologies might be suggested, from the na- 
ture of Comedy itself, which is a much surer ground, than to 
refer its name to the adventitious circumstance, that merry poems 
were sung at merry meetings, in which no particular reference 
to Comedy can be traced. K&pj/oj, among other senses, means 
* Vafer/crafty, cunning, sly. See Schrevelii Lexicon, art. Kop-^oe, 
which might refer to the cunning tricks which Comedyrepresents ; 
and, if it be objected that in Ko^o;, Koo-jxoc, and KopJ/o?, the 
first syllable is written with O micron, the short o, but that 
Kw/Aw&a is spelt with O mega, the long 0, the answer is, that in 
all the three words above, the first syllable is long by position ; 
and that, apparently, to preserve it of the same quantity, the 
persons who formed the word KupuSiu., made the change, be- 
cause, in the last word, the vowel is followed but by one con- 
sonant ; and if they had not done so, it would have been na- 
turally short. Scaliger, Poetices lib. i. cap. 5, says, speaking 
of Pastoral Compositions, * Ab his' [sc. PastoraliaJ ' orta postea 


When Epicharmus had produced, before the 
wife of Hiero, king of Syracuse l , some obscene 
composition, or representation, and had conse- 
quently been, for so doing-, very deservedly ba- 
nished to the island of Co, his writings, together 
with their name of Comedy, passed over to all 
the Grecian cities, and even to the inhabitants of 
Attica, among whom, the Comedies of Epichar- 
mus were afterwards held in such estimation, that 
Chonnidas, Magnes, and Mullus, illustrious co- 
mic poets of Athens, wrote after his model. These 
persons, Epicharmus and Phormis, are said to 
have been the first who, in addition to reproaches 
on the citizens, introduced any thing of fictitious 
plot. But, down to the time here mentioned, the 
ancient Comedy consisted only of a chorus of 
Singers and Musical Performers, and was the same 
with that which flourished at Athens in the first 
age of Comedy. 

Many other particulars were afterwards added 
to it ; and, when Pericles was in the highest power 
at Athens, the second age of Comedy had its be- 
ginning. Under his government, the people de- 

* Comoedia. Quare Theocritus communi verbo usus est et Pas- 
4 torali et Scenicae Actioni, 

ic Kwu«(7o)i tTotI ray A^apuXX^a,'* 

1 Hiero, king of Syracuse, reigned. 208 years before the 
writing of the Parian Chronicle, and 500 before the birth of 
our Saviour. Prideaux, ' Marmora Oxoniensia/ p. 170, and 
s Redintegrate Annotationes,' ibid. d. 63. 


voted themselves to Scenical or Dramatic Repre- 
sentations ; and, by giving great prizes to the sue* 
cessful candidates, had stimulated the Comic Poets 
to the cultivation of the Drama, in consequence 
©f which, several improvements were made. Cra- 
tinus introduced actors, and divided Comedy into 
acts. Crates, Plato the comic writer, Pherecrates, 
and Phrynichius, added other particulars, till at 
length, in the time of the Peloponnesian war, it was 
entirely brought to perfection by Eupolis and Ari- 
stophanes. That kind of Comedy which, in these 
two former ages, flourished at Athens, was called 
the Old Comedy; but it was excessively bitter, 
and sometimes obscene, and censured by name 
the manners and conduct of the first citizens. For 
this reason the people were much delighted with 
it, who,, through envy, are always gratified with 
hearing censure on their superiors. To attract 
from the lower order a still greater portion of ap- 
plause, the Comic Poets spared no one ; but, with 
the same degree of licence, though not of justice, 
as they used towards Cleon, Cleopbon, and Hy- 
perbolus, seditious and worthless persons, they 
attacked even the most worthy ; such, for instance, 
ag Euripides and Socrates, the former of whom 
was introduced by Aristophanes in his Equites, 
and the latter in his Nebulae. 

After Athens had been taken by Lysander, this 
licence of abuse was prohibited ; a law being pass- 
ed, which gave to those who had suffered from 
representations on the Stage, a right of proceeding 

the Mature of poetry. 155 

in the courts of Justice against the Poet. The- 
Chorus, amongst whom this practice of censure 
principally prevailed, was, from this time, there- 
fore, removed from Comedy ; and here the third 
age of Comedy began. That kind which flourished 
at this time, was, after the invention of the New, 
styled the Middle Comedy, Of this species there 
were 107 plays of the better sort acted at Athens ; 
and the Comic Poets, by whom they were written* 
are reckoned to have been in number 57, of whom 
Antiphsnes^ and Stephanus were the most cele- 
brated. It differed from the Old, because it had 
no Chorus, and attacked nobody by name, except 
the Comic Poets themselves ; for, after this law 
against abuse was made, a licence was still al- 
lowed to the Poets, of censuring the sayings and 
writings of each other, and the rest of the Poets ; 
in which respect, therefore, it came to pass, that 
this TrupsTL&cccrsig, digression, transition, or inter- 
lude, succeeded to the Chorus. Under this licence 
the Poets did not, however, confine themselves to 
those of their own profession, but attacked others; 
and even the principal citizens, concealing their 
names, were thus obscurely and enigmatically 
pointed at, so that every one suspected that these 
sarcasms were designed against himself. In the 
time of Alexander the Great, this latter kind of 
attack was therefore also prohibited; and all power 
of reprehending was, from that time, taken away 
from Comedy. 

From this period, therefore, the fourth age of 


Comedy followed ; and the kind of Comedy which 
flourished in that, was called the New. From the 
Middle Comedy it differed, because it had a pro- 
logue, instead of the 7r<xpsx£oz<r8(c> digression, trans- 
ition, or interlude, all licence for censure being 
taken away ; from the Old Comedy of the second 
age, because it had no Chorus ; and from that of 
the first age, because that was wholly performed 
by the Chorus, without actors, and this only by 
the actors, without the Chorus. Of this New Co- 
medy, the more celebrated Greek writers were 64 
in number, of whom Philemon, Menander, Di- 
philus, Philippides, Posidippus, and Apollodorus, 
are named in the Prolegomena to the notes on 
Aristophanes, as the most illustrious. But, in 
the judgment of all, the greatest praise was due 
to Menander, whose plays are reckoned at 108, 
From him Comedy received its last perfection; 
and he was the first who rendered it what, in our 
time, is exhibited by comedians on the stage. 

Of the three sorts of Comedy above described, 
the Old, the Middle, and the New, the Romans only 
imitated the New ; and the first person who exhi- 
bited that at Rome, was Livius Andronicus, the 
freed man of Marcus Livius Salinator, to whose 
children he was also tutor. He, in the year of 
Rome 514 k , when C. Claudius Cento and M. 
Sempronius Tuditanus were Consuls, and in the 

k Helvicus, in his Chronology, says it was in the year of 
Rome 513, and 238 before Christ. Helvici Chronologia, p. 7.5* 


second year after the first Punic war, was the ear- 
liest cause of Comedy and Tragedy being exhibited 
to the Romans. The example of Livius Andronicus 
was, five years afterwards, followed by Nasviiis, 
who also wrote an history of the first Punic war, 
in which he was present. After him Licinius, 
Csecilius, Plautus, Terence, and many other co- 
mic writers, flourished at Rome ; but Plautus 
and Terence were the most illustrious of them all K 

Of the foregoing- sorts of Comedy, as described 
under the four different ages, the following seems 
to be the correct classification and distinction. 

The first, which does not merit the name of 
Comedy, as it was only that species of composi- 
tion from which Comedy was taken, is said to 
have been wholly performed by the Chorus, with- 
out actors ; and could, therefore, have had none 
of the characteristics of Comedy, or been any 
thing more than a Song, sung by many voices, ac- 
companied, perhaps, by instruments, but without 
any peculiarity of Dress for the Performers. 

The second, which was the first entitled to the 
name of Comedy, was exactly a similar performance 
to the first, just mentioned, only it was sung by 
persons habited in a long robe, which reached 
down to their heels, and might, perhaps, have had 

1 See the ' Notae Historicae ad Chronicon Marmoreum, Pri-. 
* deaux, Marmora Oxoniensia,' p. 204, &c. (of which, Pri- 
deaux, in the Preface to his volume, confesses himself the au-> 
thor), and the several authorities there cited. 



something more of narrative, history, and con- 
trivance in the Songs. 

The third, by the introduction of actors, had 
necessarily ceased to he a musical performance 
throughout ; and, by the division of the Comedy 
into acts, had limited the Chorus only to a per- 
formance between the acts. 

And the fourth, by the total rejection of the 
Chorus, even from that place, had transferred their 
office merely to one or two performers on the 
Tibia or Flute. 

When such a species of performance as Co- 
medy had once been received, the transition from 
that to Tragedy was easy and natural ; because 
this last was, in fact, only a more dignified sort 
of the same mode of representation, confined, it 
is true, to events of a different complexion. It ap- 
pears, from the Parian Chronicle, written 91 years 
after the birth of Alexander the Great m , and, con- 
sequently, 265 before that of our Saviour n , that 
the actors of Comedy, of which Susarion and 
Dolon were said to have been the inventors, were 
between the years 318 and 297 before the writing 
of that Chronicle, carried about in waggons by 

m See the Chronicle itself, in Prideaux, Marmora Gxoni- 
ensia, p. 173. 

n Alexander the Great is placed, by Saxius, 334 years 
before our Saviour, Saxii Onomasticon, vol. i. p. 70; and 
the author of the Parian Chronicle occurs mentioned in that 
work, vol. i. p. 105, as living 263 years before the Christian 



the Icarians ; and that the reward of these per- 
formers was a basket of figs and a cask of wine , 
And from the same unquestionable authority it is 
also learnt that Thespis the poet, who first taught 
Tragedy, flourished 273 years before the writing 
of that Chronicle, and that the compensation for 
such a performance was a goat p. Comedy, there- 
fore, was certainly the earlier invention ; and the 
smallest distance of time between the rise of Co- 
medy and Tragedy, is 24 years, the greatest 50. 

As Comedy had obtained a name, most evi- 
dently, either from its being represented in a pe- 
culiar Dress, by which circumstance it differed 
from the former sorts of Poetry, or from the In- 
tricacy and Perplexity of its Plot, in which also it 
did not resemble them, it was necessary that Tra- 
gedy should be characterized by some appellation, 
which should contradistinguish it from Comedy, 
to which it more nearly approached, than to any 
other species of Poetry. Now the difference be- 
tween Comedy and Tragedy consisted chiefly in 
this, that Comedy represented joyful and prosper- 
ous subjects and events, while Tragedy was con- 
cerned with such only as were calamitous and 
unfortunate. From this, which it had assumed as 
its province, Tragedy was so called ; and the ap- 
pellation is manifestly derived from T^f#x,a^c 5 

9 See the Chronicle itself, Prideaux, ubi supra, p. 167* 
f Ibid. p. 168. 


Turbulent us, a derivative adjective from T^patnrw 
or Tuf>c&TTM, Turbo, Commoveo c *. 7Vo<%%^c, pro- 
bably, soon became corrupted to Tf>oi%oo$Yig, and 
that to T^ocyca^yiCy from which last, Tp^y^S/^ is 
easily derivable. 

* See Schrevelii Lexicon, art. T«p«^w^*iff and Tapacc-w. 



Comedy not a Musical Performance throughout* 

Titles of Terence's Plays have occasioned the question.— Aris- 
totle's opinion that it had Music only in particular parts, 
namely, between the acts. — His sentiments on the parts of 
Tragedy. — Remarks on it. — Evanthius says the Chorus re- 
jected, and why, in the New Comedy,— In the Roman 
Comedies, Music, how employed. — Passage from Plautus's 
Pseudolus. — Another from his Casina. — Horace, his opinion 
as to the Chorus. — Remarks on it. — His sentiments as to the 
use of the Tibia. — Diomedes, his opinion on the parts of 
Comedy. — Remarks on it. — Passage from the Prolegomena, 
Terence, edit. ]479. — Another from the same. — Another 
from Terence, edit. 1499. — Another from Guido Juvenalis, 
in the same edition. — Another from Iodocus Badius Ascen- 
sius, Terence, edit. 1527. — Another from Terence, edit. 
Aldus, 1570.— Another from Juventius, Terence, edit. 
Spencer, 17oi. — Another from Scaliger De Poetice. — Rea- 
sons why Comedy could not have been a musical perform- 

From the mention, in the titles to the plays of Te- 
rence, that they were acted e Tibiis paribus dextris 
i et sinistris V ' Tibiis duabns dextris V ' Tibiis im- 

Andria. See its title. s Eunuch. See its title, 


6 paribus 1 / < Duabus dextris 11 / ' Tibiis SarranisV 
< Tibiis paribus V ' Tibiis im paribus V some persons- 
have been, very erroneously and absurdly, led to 
suppose that they were accompanied with Music 
throughout, and that both Tragedy and Comedy, 
among the Greeks, were thus performed. This 
conjecture has, in fact, been, in some measure, 
already refuted by the account given in the pre- 
ceding Section, of the nature and difference of 
each species of Comedy, as it prevailed in turn at 
different periods. But that no shadow of doubt 
may remain, nor any suspicion be entertained, if 
the inquiry were here omitted, that it was avoided, 
because it could not be pursued, it shall now be 
shown, that the above opinion is not only contrary 
to Reason, but to positive evidence, also, of the 
fact still existing. 

Aristotle, De Poetica, cap. i. after terming 
Epic Poetry, Tragic Poetry, Comedy, and Dithy- 
rambic, all imitations, but on what grounds he so 
conceived them, does not appear, as the idea is 
much too general and indefinite, says, that this 
imitation is effected by the Rhythmus or Versifica- 
tion, by Speaking and by Music; and that, in 
some cases, these are separately employed, and in 
others all at one and the same time. His words 

* Heautontimorumenos, cm its first performance. See its 

u Tl*e same play, on its second representation. See its title. 
x Adelphi.. See its title. * Hecyra. See its title- 

7 Phormio* See its title.. 


are in substance, as follow : ' But there are some 
' arts, which make use of all the before-mentioned 
' particulars, namely, the Rhythmus, Music, and 

* Metre, as, for instance, Dithyrambic Poetry, 
s Mimetic Poetry, Tragedy, and Comedy ; but 
s they differ from each other in this respect, that 
' those use them all together at the same time 5 

* but these only employ them separately a v Again, 
cap. vi. denning the nature of Tragedy, the same 
author expresses himself to the following effect: 

* Tragedy is, therefore, an imitation of a serious 

* and perfect action, possessing magnitude, ac- 

* companied with a pleasant style of speaking, 
6 each sort keeping within its own province ; not 
' by means of narration, but through Pity and Fear, 

* exciting correspondent emotions. A pleasant 

* style of speaking I call that, which has Rhyth- 
' mus or Versification, Harmony or Proportion, 
6 and Music ; but, by each sort keeping within its 
c province, I mean that some things are effected 

* by Metre alone, and others again by means of 

koci y.i'Aii y.srfu 9 cocrKzp fin twv dt0ypaju.tiiK.wy Tro^'crt? >ta/ y rwy 
uiuluV) xai *}T£ rpaywo/a, ■» v.ui [ax dice, dwA<sfe<7i <je, on a* uey au.ct 

craa-iv, at d£ xara ustoe.'— ' Artes autem sunt nonnullae, quse su- 
pradictis omnibus utimtur ; nempe Rhythmo, et Concentu, et 
Metro; sicut Poesis Dithj*rambica et Mimica, Tragosdia et 
Comoedia. Distant autem inter se eo quod illse quidera om- 
nibus simul utuntur, hae vero partim.' Aristot. De Poetica, 
8yo. Oxon. 1760, p. 2 & 53. Some editions instead of pjuav 
read vo^w, which signifies hymns, * in laudem Apollinis/ Ibid, 
p. 116. 

.$1 2, 


6 Music V And, lastly, cap. xii. the same author, 
stating of what parts Tragedy consists, thus deli- 
vers his opinion : ( The parts, indeed, of Tragedy, 
' which, as being essential to its nature, ought to 
' be used, have been mentioned above ; but ac- 

< cording to quantity and distinct division, they 
' are these : the Prologue, the Episode, the Cata- 
' strophe, the Performances of the Chorus ; and, 

< of these latter, one part is the Parodus, the other 
' the Stasimon. These parts are, indeed, common 
4 to all Tragedies ; but those peculiar only to some, 
' are what are spoken from that part of the the- 
' atre called the Scene and the Commi. The Pro- 
' logue, indeed, is an entire part of Tragedy, pre- 
' vious to the entry of the Chorus c . But the 

b * Er'v Qv Tfocyuh'a p.t[j.v\<Ttc TTpctfswj <77r»da/»j TtXtiKCj psyzGos 
i l^ttcris, rtcvo-jxeiu Xoyv, %wp/j \x.arti t£v zlduv Iv TO<V y.ofioi$ dpwyTWV, Y.VA 
' y dV tTCtxyyiXta.^ aXXa, h sXm koX Q6£u nvipa,ivu<j<x t^v t£v to/«tw* 

* iraQv^aroiiy xa9apcny. Xtyio ot f^wry-ivov [*h Xoyov, rov b^ovt<x fv9[xov x.ccl 
c «cjixcy/av nat jiaeXo?. to de X w $ l $ T ^v 5 '°k'v, T ° ha [xirpw EV*a (jlovov <7Ttpcci~ 

* vEo-Sa*, ?ca< TraXtv srepa ha f*sXtt$.' — \ Est igitur Tragcedia imitatio 

* actionis serise et perfects, magnitudinem habentis, adhibito 

* sermone jucundo — quaque specie suas vices distincte servante 
< , — non enarrando, sed Misericordia et Metu similes effectus 
i purgans — sermonem jucundum appello eum, quihabeat Rhyth- 
' mum, et Harmoniam, et Concentum — quaque autem specie, 

* <Src. — ut nonnulla efficiantur per Metra solum, et rursus alia 

* per Concentus.' — Aristot. De Poetica, p. 9 & 6L 

c There is every reason to think that the meaning of the 
word Chorus has been much misunderstood, and that it does 
not necessarily mean a company of Musical Performers, but 
only a company of persons in general; in consequence of which, 
it ought only to signify, in Tragedy and Comedy, a company or 
number of bystanders. It is true that, after actors and speak- 


* Episode is an entire part of Tragedy, between 
' the full Songs of the Chorus. The Catastrophe 

ing were introduced, instead of its being, as it was originally, a 
Musical Performance or Song throughout, the Songs which were 
still retained as interludes between the acts, were uniformly 
given to the Chorus ; but this was the consequence of the plan 
being only in part, and not totally, changed. Its true etymology 
is probably from Xoo>, Aggero (see Schrevelii Lexicon, art. 
Xou), and Pew, Fluo (Ibid. art. Pew) ; which, united, would mean 
a conflux of persons. Agger, is rendered by Littleton, in his 
Dictionary, among other senses, a Heap of any thing ; and 
Aggeratim, the adverb, is said by him to mean * By heaps, 
1 piled on each other. Acervatim, Agminatim.' Now Agmina- 
tim signifies by bands or companies. Littleton's Diet, which is 
the very sense wanted. Hederic, in his Lexicon, art. Agger, 
says, ' Agger, to x w /* a > Dem. o x^-> *> Thuc. aggerem duco 

* xvvwfxt xupx.' — Aristotle, De Poetica, edit. Oxon. 1760, p. 7 
& 59, speaking of Comedy, says, that the %opov kujjlc^&» 9 or 
Chorus Comcedorum, was but late given ; for that, before that, 
the performers were merely volunteers. His words are, ' 'H £» 

1 Jttouwd/a, dio. to ^t.75 o"7iovou^so~'jcct sf Mpx'^i thctv-v, acci yap p^opoy y.uu.iw 

* $u>v o'-^e tote o app/^v eXkev, «xa' s'GcAovtai %<rcnvJ — * Comoedia vero, 

* e» quod non ab initio in rebus seriis versabatur, latuit, etennn 
' magistratus sero dedit Chorum Comcedorum, sed e voiuntariis 
' constabat.' By x°P v x.*>py$wv 9 or Chorus Comcedorum, it is evi- 
dent he can only mean a licenced company of comedians, in 
opposition to those who were not professional, but mere volun- 
tary and only occasional performers. 

Considering the Chorus, not as necessarily musical perform- 
ers, but only as bystanders, the introduction of them some- 
times into the Dialogue, is not unreasonable ; and, at others, but 
still under the idea of their being only a multitude of persons, 
and not in their musical character, they might, as bystanders, 
be employed between the acts, to entertain or amuse the audi- 
ence by songs, which, as being sung by several voices, were not 
sufficiently intelligible to the vulgar part of the audience ; and 
this might compel Menander to reduce them to a single voice, 
accompanied with instruments. 

M 3 


c is an entire part of Tragedy, after which, there 
< is no Music of the Chorus. The parts of the 
' Chorus are, indeed, these : the Parodus is the 
c first speech of the whole Chorus ; but the Stasi- 
' nion is a song of the Chorus, in which neither 
c the Anapaest nor Trochee is used. The Coramus 
6 is a general lamentation of the Chorus, and is 
f delivered from that part of the theatre called the 
f Scene d .' 

The first performance of the Chorus which 
took place in the interval between the Prologue 
and Episode is afterwards termed Parodus, evi^ 

* Msp*) d£ Tpayo>d/»$, otg jxev w$ Hdzvi ait xpycr-jcct, TpguTEpoy ttTTopWo 
6 koto, as to ttcxtov, koci elg a, aiocteznctt .K6%wptT/x£va, robot eW. 7rpoXoyojj 

i sVeWO&OV, £|o^O--, XpflKQV* KOCl T«T«, TO JU.EV TTafO^O^ TO ^S J-^Vi/AOy. 

* koivm /xev Sv ci7ra'vTwv ravjot,' i'dscfc d£, Ta unto t*j§ crx.wvi$ koh y.Ojj.{xoi. est* 
4 ^£ 7r£o'Xoyo$ /xev, pzpog oXov T|osyw£/otc to 7T£0 %Gp3 srapoog. iirzicodiov d£, 
6 jtAEpoj oXpv Tpaywdtaf, to [xirc^v oXwv p^o^jciv ijuXudi. Efodbs' d£ 5 /AEpof 
c oXov TpaywdYaj, ju,e6' o y;c es~i %°^S fjaXo^. ^optxit of, 7rci~>ido$ ^Ey, *j 
6 k^uta Xj'Ik oXa XH B ' r<fc3"*/40v as, [jlsXoc xoaov, to ayeu ava^ra/roy Jta< 

* T§o%atoJ. xo'/x/xo.- d£, O^rivoj jjoivoj %o^oy jtai aVo enttiyij;. — * Partes 

* quidem Tragcediae, quibus quasi speciebus uti dehemus, supra 

* diximus, secundum vero quantitatem, et distinctam divisiq- 
' nem, hae sunt: — Prologus, Episodium, Exodus, Choricum ; 
6 et hujus altera quidem pars Parodus, altera vero Stasimon, 

* hae quidem partes omnibus communes sunt ; propria? vero quae 
« e Scena adhibentur, et Commi. — — Prologus quidem est pars 

* integra Tragcediae ante ingressionem Chori. Episodium vero 

4 est pars integra Tragcediae inter plenas cantiones choricas. 
? Exodus est pars integra Tragcediae post quam nullus Chori est 
f Concentus.- Chorici quidem Parodus est prima dictio totius 

* Chori. Stasimon vero est Melos Chori quod nee Anapaesto 

< neque Trochaeo utitur. Commas est communis deploratiq 

' Chori et © Scena.'— Aristot. De P.oetica, p. 18 & 72. 


dently from Uupa c$cc, Per viam, because, no doubt, 
they entered in procession, singing e . The second 
performance of the Chorus, which followed the 
Episode, and preceded the Exodus or Catastrophe, 
is termed Stasimon ; and said to contain neither 
the Anapaest nor Trochee. Stasimon means sta- 

e The etymology of the term Parodus, and the reason why 
it was so called, as mentioned in the text, it is evident there 
can be no cause to question ; but it is necessary to notice an 
ambiguity in the original passage of Aristotle, which makes it 
doubtful whether 7r«po3b?, in one place, should be rendered Paro- 
dus, as referring to the performance of the Chorus, or whether 
it should be more closely translated, according to its original 
signification, by the substantive Ingressio. He says, eV* ^ «■(»- 
Xoyo$ fjLsv 9 /xe'^oj oXov r^ccyuaia,^ to tt^o x ^ vctfodx, which may either 
be rendered, ' Est autem Prologus quidem pars integra Tragce- 
4 diae ante Chori ingressionem.' or ' ante Chori Parodum/ In the 
former manner it stands in the Latin version which accompanies 
the 8vo. edit, of Aristotle, De Poetica, Oxon. 1760, and also 
in that inserted in Mr. Tynvhitt's edition. In Mr. Cooke's 
edit. Cantab. 1785, which professes to follow Gulston's edition 
of the text, it is translated thus: « Est vero Prologus tota pars 
* Tragoediae, quae praecedit ingressum Chori ;' and it is true that 
this is the more close translation, according to its original sig- 
nification. But it is evident it is also capable of the latter con- 
struction, in which it would refer to the Parodus, or Perform- 
ance of the Chorus, of which performance he is also speaking. 
In either case it will not affect the passage in the text of the 
present work, because the reason for the etymology is suffi- 
ciently strong, without any assistance to support it. If, how~ 
ever, Ingressio, or Ingressus, is the right translation, that 
sense corroborates the etymology in the text here. If Parodus 
is to be preferred, the very circumstance of the error shows 
how reasonable the above etymology must have been, when it 
could induce any one to think that Aristotle had intended to 
use Tlxfo&s in that very sense, 

M 4 


tionary f ; and this performance was so called, be-? 
cause the Chorus continued in their places, while 
it was sung. The reason for excluding the Ana- 
paest and trochee was probably that these were 
considered as too lively or tripping feet, to suit 
with the idea of a stationary performance. As to 
the Commus, from xo^uos, Planctus, it seems to 
have been only that part in which the Chorus ex- 
pressed their sorrow and commiseration for the 
{sufferings of the principal characters. Aristotle 
speaks of this last, as occurring, not universally 
in all Tragedies, but as peculiar to some only; 
^nd, perhaps, in those it might be a part given to 
the Chorus by way of conclusion or moral to the 
whole piece. 

From these passages it is clear that Aristotle 
had no other idea of the use of Music in Tragedy, 
than as applied in different stages of the perform- 
ance, and that pnly between the acts of the 

In the New Comedy, it is well known, that 
the Chorus was rejected ; and, indeed, it is suffi- 
ciently evident, from observing that, in this spe- 
cies, no speeches of the Chorus ever occur inter- 
mixed with those of the other interlocutors, as 
t'he}^ do in the Tragedies of ^Eschylus, Euripides,, 
and Sophocles, and in the Comedies of Aristo- 
phanes, EvanthiuSj a grammarian, who lived in 

f Lraori^os Stativpg, Stabijis. Schrevelii Lexicon, art. It«=» 


the reign of Constantius, the son of Constantine? 5 
and consequently about the year 337 of the Chris- 
tian sera h , has assigned the following reason for 
its rejection, which is here given in his own words, 
as they stand introduced by the editor of that 
edition among the Prolegomena to the Delphin 
edition of Terence, p. xxxv. ; but he seems to have 
mistaken both the cause for the change, and the 
manner in which it was made, and to have con- 
founded the Chorus, when used in the Drama it- 
self, with that which was introduced between the 
acts, from which, as will be seen in a subsequent 
Section 1 , it was entirely and certainly distinct. 
Speaking of Comedy, he says, p. 26, ' De qua cum 
c multa dicenda sint, sat erit tamen, velut ad- 
* monendi lectoris causa, quod de arte comica 
f veterum chartis cbntinetur exponere. Comcedia 
' vetus, ut ab initio Chorus fuit, paulatimque per- 
6 sonarum numero in quinque actus processit, ita 
< paulatim, velut attrito atque extenuato Choro^ ad 
' Novam Comcediam sip pervenit, ut in ea non 
* modo non inducatur Chorus, sed ne locus quidem 
1 ullus jam relinquatur Choro. Nam, postquam 
c otioso tempore fastidiosior spectator effectus. 

6 See the Prolegomena to the Delphin edition of Terence, 
Svo. Lond. 1768, p. xxiv. 

h Helvici Chronologiu, edit. fo. Oxon. 1662, p. 96- Le 
Clerc, in his Compendium Hist. Univ. 12mo. Lond. 1735, 
p. 113, makes it about 333 of the Christian sera. Clerici 
Compend. Hist. Univers. 12mo s Lond. 1735, p. 113. 

1 Section XIX. 


4 tunc cum ad cantores ab actoribus fabula trans- 
€ ibat, consurgere et abire coepisset, admonuit 

* Poetas primo quidem Chores praetermittere, lo- 

* cum ejus relinquentes, ut Menander fecit hac de 
i causa, non ut alii existimant alia. Postremo, 

* ne locum quidem reliquerunt, quod Latini fece- 
' runt Comici, unde apud illos dirimere actus 

* quinquepartitos difficile est k .' 

In the Roman Comedies, Music was, in like 
manner, employed between the acts, and some- 
times occasionally intermixed with the Dialogue, 
when a Marriage or Sacrifice, for instance, was to 
be represented on the stage. In the Pseudolus of 
Plautus, Act I. Sc. 5, when Pseudolus is about to 
quit the stage, he says, 

* Concedere aliquantisper hinc mihi intro lubet, 
' Dum concenturio in corde sycophantias ; 
4 Tibicen vos interea delectaverit.' 

And in the Casina of the same author, Act IV. 
Sc. 3, Olympic uses these words : 

1 Age, tibicen, dum illam educant hue novam nuptam foras, 
4 Suavi cantu concelebra omnem hunc plateam hymenaeo, 

* Io hymen, hymenaee, lo hymen.' 

k Donatus, in a Fragment, ' De Comcedia et Tragcedia,' in- 
serted in the Prolegomena prefixed to the Delphin edition of 
Terence, p. xxx. says, speaking of the Music, * Hujusmodi 

* adeo carmina ad tibias fiebant, ut his auditis, multo ex 
4 populo ante discerent quam fabulam acturi scenici essent, 

* quam omnino spectatoribus ipsis antecedens titulus, pronunci- 

* aretur/ Now, if the people discovered from the character or 
kind of Music, what was to follow, it is evident that the Music 
must have preceded, and not have accompanied, the words. 


Horace also, in his Art of Poetry, v. 193, recog- 
nises the use of the Chorus, as he calls it, be- 
tween the acts ; but the Chorus of Horace, as it 
appears to have been understood, even by him- 
self, was evidently very different from the an- 
cient Chorus in its early state, as employed by the 
Greek tragic and comic authors, prior to its rejec- 
tion by Menander ; for he says it should only sup- 
ply the place of one actor, or, as the commentator 
on the Delphin edition explains it, that, although 
it consisted of several persons, only one, the Co- 
ryphaeus, should speak ; that nothing should be 
sung between the acts, which did not relate to the 
subject of the play; and he points out to what 
objects the attention of the Chorus, in those inter- 
mediate performances, may be directed. 

' Actoris partes ' Chorus officiumque virile 
' Defendat, neu quid roedios intercinat actus, 
' Quod non proposito conducat et haereat apte> 
1 Hie bonis faveatque, et concilietur atnicis, 
' Et reget iratos, et amet peccare timentes, 
* Hie dapes Iaudet mensae brevis, ille salutem, 
' Justitiam, legesque, et apertis ostia postis. 

1 ' Actons partes] Chorus eos exhibet, qui rei peractae in* 
' terfuerlnt; plures sunt homines, sed unus loquitur, Cory- 
* phaeus, dictus. Porro Chorum, jam prrdem obsoletum, in- 
e staurari velit, maximum Scenae ornamentum, non abs re 
*■ exoptat Hedelinus, ante Iaudatus, ac de ill is egregie dissent, 
f jPrax. Theatr. 1. hi. c. 4, ubi redarguit Aristotelem et Scalige- 
' rum, apud quos perperam Chorus appellatur otiosus rerum 
f curator.' — See the note on the Delphin edition of Horace, 
De Arte Poetica, v. 193c 


' Ille tegat commlssa, Deosque precatur et oret, 
1 Ut redeat miseris, abeat fortuna superbis/ 

In the lines Immediately succeeding" these, he de- 
scribes the use of the Tibia, which he confines 
solely to its employment by the Chorus of musical 
performers, evidently for the purpose of accom- 
panying the Coryphaeus. 

4 Tibia, non ut nunc" 1 orichalco vincta tubaeque 
* iEmula, sed tenuis, simplexque, foramine pauco, 

* Aspirare et adesse Choris erat utilis, atque, 

* Nondum spissa nimis, complere sedilia flatu, 

' Quo sane pppulus numerabilis, utpote parvus, 

* Et frugi castusque, verecundusque coitu. 

' Postquam ccepit agros extendere victor, et urbem 

* Latior amplecti muris, vinoque diurno 

* Placari Genius, festis impune diebus. 

*■ Accessit numerisque modisque licentia major. 
4 Inductus quid enim saperet liberque laborum 
i Kusticus urbano, confusis turpis honesto? 

* Sic priscae metumque et luxuriam addidit arti 

* Tibicen, traxitque vagis per pulpita vestem : 
4 Sic etiam fidibus voces crevere severis, 

* Et tulit eloquium insolitum facundia praeceps, 
« Utiliumque sagax rerum, et divina futuri, 

* Sortilegis non discrepant sententia Delphis.' 

Diomedes the grammarian, who lived, pro- 
bably, between the year 410 and 412 of the Chris- 

m In the same Delphin edition, the following note occurs 
on v. 202 of the same poem. * Tibia non ut nunc] * Chorus in 

* mediis actibus agebat, et loquebatur, per Coryphaeum, ut 

* ante dictum est. Sed praeterea, inter unum et alterum Ac- 
' turn, canebat, saltobatque. Hinc mentionem facit Horatius 

* de instrumentis musicis Chori concentum adjuvantibus.' 


tian aera n , and whose work, c De Oratione et Par- 
c tibus Orationis et Genere Metrorum,' occurs 
among the Grammatical Latinae Auctores, pub- 
lished by Putschius, as well as being extant in 
several separate editions, certainly thought the 
Dialogue a distinct part from the Music and se- 
parately employed, when he speaks, as he does, 
col. 489, in the following terms : c Membra 
' Comcediarum tria sunt, Diverbium, Canticum, 
' Chorus : Membra Comcediae diversa sunt, definito 
6 tamen numero, continentur a quinque usque ad 
c decern. Diverbia sunt partes Comcediarum, in 
' quibus diversorum personam versantur. Personae 
' autem Diverbiorum sunt duae, aut tres, raro 
' autem quatuor esse debent : ultra augere nume- 

< rum non licet. In Canticis, autem, una tan turn 
' debet esse persona, aut, si duae fuerint, ita de- 

< bent esse, ut ex occulto una audi at nee conlo- 
' quatur, sed secum, si opus fuerit, verba faciat. 
( In Choris, vero, numerus personarum definitus 

< non est, quippe junctim omnes loqui debent, 
6 quasi voce confusa, et concentum in unam per- 
6 sonam reformantes. Latinae vero Comcediae Cho- 
6 rum non habent, sed duobus tantum membris 
* constant, Diverbio, et Cantico. Primis autem 
' temporibus, ut asserit Tranquillus, omnia, quae 
' in Scena versantur, in Comcedia agebantur. 
' Nam Pantomimus, et Pithaules, et Choraules, 
S- in Comcedia canebant. Sed quia non poterant 

n Saxius ? vol. i. p, 481. 


omnia simul, apud omnes artifices, pariter excels 
lere, si qui erant, inter actores Comoediarum^ 
pro facultate et arte potiores, principatum sibi 
artifices vendicabant. Sic factum est/ lit nolen- 
tibus cedere Mimis in artificio suo caeteris sepa- 
ratio fieret reliquorum. Nam dum potiores in- 
ferioribus, qui in omni ergasterio erant, servire 
dedignabantur, seipsos a Comoedia separaverunt^ 
ac sic factum est, ut exemplo simul sumpto., 
unusquisque artis suae rem exequi cceperit, neque 
in Comcediam venire, cujus rei indicia prodant 
nobis antiquee Comoediae, in quibus inveniuntur 
6 acta tibiis paribus/' aut "imparibus," aut " sar- 
c ranis." Quando, enim, Chorus canebat choricis 
tibiis, id est, Choraulicis, artifex concinebat. In 
Canticis, autem, Pithaulicis responsabat. Sed 
quod " paribus tibiis," vel " imparibus," inveni- 
mus scriptum, hoc significat, quod, si quando 
monodio agebat, unam tibiam infiabat, si quando 
synodio utrmsque.' 
There cannot be a stronger proof, than this 5 
how little Diomedes really understood of the sub- 
ject, how unwilling he was to confess his own ig- 
norance, and how ready to wrest the meanings 
of words, by no means ambiguous, to perverse 
purposes, in order to confirm his own ill-founded 
prejudices and irrational opinions. When he 
speaks of the Pantomimus^ the Pithaules, and the 
Choraules, as all singing together in Comedy, he 
evidently confounds the actors with the singers, 
and relates what is impossible ; for the Pantomi- 


mus, as appears from his very name, certainly did 
not sing, or even speak, but represented every thing 
by dumb show. In like manner, he has also con- 
founded together the Old and the New Comedy ; for 
the Comedies, which are described as acted " tibiis 
" paribus," aut " imparibus," aut " Sarranis," are 
those of Terence, and of the new species, some of 
them translations from Menander; and, in that 
sort, it is confessed, as, indeed, is evident from 
an inspection of Plautus and Terence, there was 
no Chorus. Even he himself notices that the 
Latin Comedy had no Chorus, as was really the 

How great is his folly, when he tells the reader, 
that when one man played by himself, only one 
instrument was used, but that, when he played 
together with other persons, more instruments 
were employed ! for this is the total amount of his 
assertion. Is not the fact he relates self-evident ? 
nay, could it possibly be otherwise ? and must not 
his conceit of his own superior Intelligence, and 
his ignorance of the talents of other men, have 
been consummate, when he could suppose there 
was any degree of Sagacity in making such a dis- 
covery ; or that others were so blind, as not to 
perceive so plain a circumstance as clearly as him- 
self, and without his assistance ? 

All he has proved, in what he has said in this 
latter part, relating to the Music, is his own want of 
Information, and the weakness of his own under- 
standing, that could be satisfied with so irrational 


an explanation ; for, when he tells the reader that 
the terms, " tibiae pares," and " tibiae impares," only 
implied that, when the performer played by him- 
self, he used but one pipe, but that when he played 
with other persons two were introduced, he betrays 
the grossest ignorance as to the nature of Music 
and musical instruments, and clearly assigns to 
the words a signification, of which he, as a Gram- 
marian, ought to have known they are totally 

Among the ProlegomeM, which follow the Life 
of Terence, and precede the book itself, in the 
edition of that author, printed at Venice, by Ni^ 
cholas Girardengus, and revised by Francis Diana, 
in the year 1479, fo. a. 3. a. is the passage already 
inserted from Evanthitis, which has there been 
evidently taken from an inaccurate copy, as it is 
manifestly given very corruptly. And, in a sub- 
sequent part of the same Prolegomena, fo. a. 3. b* 
the following passage occurs : c Comcediam esse, 
' Cicero ait, Imitation em Vitae, Speculum Consue- 
' tudinis, Imaginem Veritatis. Comcediae, autem, 
' more antiquo dictee, quia in vicis hujusmodi car- 
* mina initio agebantur apud Graecos, ut in Italia, 
s Compitaliciis ludicris, admixto pronunciations 
c modulo, quo, dum actus cpmmutantur, populus 
ff detinebatur .' 

° In the Prolegomena Terentiana, before the Delphin 
edition, p. 27, this is given as a part of * Donati Fragmentutn 
* De Comcedia et Tragosdia.* Donates is said to have lived in the 



Again, in another part, among the same Prole- 
gomena, (fo. a. 4 b.) are these words : f Est autem 

* minutum velum, quod populo obsistit, dum fabu- 
6 larum actus commutantur ; de umbra histriones 

* pronunciabant. Cantica vero temperabantur, 
( modis non a poeta sed a perito artis musicse 
< factis p.' 

In the edition of Terence, printed at Venice, 
by Lazarus de Soardis, 7 Nov. 1499, is added, 
among the Prolegomena, (fo. 5 a.) a section, en- 
titled ' Quid Comoedia, unde dicta, quot ejus 
' species, quot membra, quotque actus sunt.' This 
section commences with a passage, in substance the 
same with that already given from Diomedes, and 
almost, though not quite, in his very words, but 
without citing his name, or noticing whence it was 
procured. It is, however, immediately succeeded 
by the following words, which, as the original 
passage as it stands in Diomedes has been already 
inserted, are all that, on the present occasion, it 
is material to notice : ' Quapropter quinqne actus, 
c qui in Comoedia sunt, difficile est nosse in Lati- 
i nis, sublato Choro, qui se interponens actus dis- 
6 tinguebat/ 

Guido Juvenalis, in the edition of Terence of 
1499, just mentioned, says, fo. 45, b. in a note at 

time of Constantine, and was contemporary with Evanthius. 
See the Delphin Terence, Prolegomena, p. xxiv. 

p This, in the Delphin edition, is also given as a part of the 
above fragment from Donatus. See the Delphin edition, before 
referred to, p. xxx. 



the end of the Andria, on that part of the title 
in which it is said, ' Modulavit Flaccus Claudii 
e tibiis duabus dextris,' c Flaccus Claudii filius 
c sup. fecit modos, i. e. modulatus est, sive modu- 
r lamina fecit musicis instrumentis, inter actus, 
6 duabus tibiis i. instrumentis musicis dextris, i, 
* gravitatem orationibus ostendentibus.' 

Iodocus Badius Ascensius, in the Proenotamenta 
to an edition of Terence, which, in the Colophon 
at the end, is said to have been corrected by Guido 
Juvenalis, explained by Iodocus Badius Ascensius, 
and printed at Lyons, by Benedict Bounyer, 1527, 
4 Feb. speaks thus, in chap. xix. which is entitled 
6 De actibus et eorum distinctione in Comoedia.' 
i Quando enim proscenium vacuum est, ita quod 
c nullus egressorum permaneat, sed omnes ingre- 
€ diantur, tune actus unus finitus est; et hoc con- 
6 tingit quinquies in singulis Comoediis, ut osten- 
6 demus, quamvis Donatus dicat nunc esse difficile 
c distinguere actus, propterea quod Chorus, qui in 
c fine cujuslibet canebat, a Comoediis ablatus est, 
Q qui tamen adhuc in Tragcediis conspicitur.' 

Prefixed to the edition of Terence, in 12mo s 
printed by Aldus, Ex Bibliotheca Aldina, Venetiis, 
1570, is a section or chapter, entitled, ' Fabula 
* Comcedise et Tragcediae item ex Donato et aliis/ 
containing the following words : c Sunt enim Tra- 
f gcedice et Comcediae quinque actus, hoc est partes, 
c ab histrionum gestibus dietae Greece 7rpoc^sg 9 qua- 
' rum singulis Chorus primum aclditus fuerat, sed, 
6 quia postquam in Comoedia, nam in Tragoedia 


* remansit, spectator coepisset esse fastidiosior, 
■■' quod ab actoribus ad cantores otioso tempore 
6 transiret, et ita illi pene desererentur, idcirco 

* prudenter a Poetis ille est prsetermissus.' 

And, lastly, Richard Spencer, A. M. in his 
edition of Terence, printed in small 8vo. Lond. 
1734, has inserted, among his prefatory papers, a 
chapter e De Musica,' taken from Juventius's edi- 
tion of Terence. It contains the following- words, 
evidently referring to the title of The Andria, and 
occurs, p. 43, c Modos fecit] Cantica certis nu- 

* meris temperavit. Post singulos actus aliquid 
' Musice canebatur, et illi numeri ac modi ab op- 
' tirnis canendi magistris fiebant.* 

Although many more instances might be pro- 
duced to the same effect % it is needless to mul- 
tiply examples, as, from the authorities already 
given, it seems impossible to think otherwise than 
that Comedy was not a Musical Performance 
throughout ; and that it had no Music, but be- 
tween the acts, except, perhaps, occasionally in 
the. case of Marriages and Sacrifices, if any such 

' Asa proof of this, one more shall here be noticed. Sca- 
liger, De Poetice, lib. i. cap. 9, speaks thus : * Chorus est pars 

* inter actum et actum. In fine, tamen, fabularum etiam Choros 
c videmus, quare tutior erit definitio, quss dicat post actum in« 
' troducta cum concentu. Is tractus non fuit uniusmodi. Sane 
' aliquando totus cum cantu, et motu, et gestu, et saltationibus 
' ad tibias. Miscebatur aliquando et versuum et tractuum va- 

* rietate; nonnunquam etiam singularibus personis. Choro au- 
' tern de Comcedia Nova sublato, explebat officium Tibicen. Id 

* quod in Pseudolo satis patet.' 

N 2 


were represented on the stage. This was evidently 
the most extensive mode in which Music was ori- 
ginally employed in the Drama, and even this Me- 
nander found himself compelled, in the formation 
of the new species of Comedy, still more strictly 
to limit p . Nothing can be more absurd than the 
idea of a musical accompaniment throughout, 
which, as that did not exist before, would have 
been an extension, not a limitation or contraction^ 
of the musical performance* 

Besides^ when Cicero s and Terentianus Mau~ 
rus l both represent the Comic writers as endea- 

r Vide supra, in a passage from Evanthius, already given. 
6 Cicero, Orator, edit. Glasg. 1748, p. 35, sect. 20. * Quid- 

4 quid est enim, quod sub aurium mensuram aliquam cadit, 

* etiam si abest a versu (nam id quidem orationis est vitium) 
6 numerus vocatur, qui Greece ovfy,o<; dicitur ; itaque video visum 

* esse nonnullis Platonis et Democriti locutionem, etsi absit a 
€ versu, tamen, quod incitatius feratur et clarissimis verborum 

5 hominibus citatur, potius poema putandum, quam comicorum 

6 poetarum, apud quos, nisi quod versiculi sunt nihil est aliud 
1 quotidiani dissimile sermonis. — At comicorum senarii, propter 
' similitudinem sermonis, sic saepe sunt abjecti, ut nonnunquam 
' vix in his numerus, aut versus, intelligi possit.' Ibid. p. 96, 
sect. 55. 

1 Terentianus Maurus, inter Grammat. Lat. Auctores, a 
Putschio, col. 2443, speaking of Iambic, says : 

f Sed qui pedestres fabuias socco premunt, 
' Ut quae loquuntur surapta de vita putes, 
* Vitiant Iambon, &e. 

Again, a few lines below : 

* In metra peccant arte non inscitia, 

* Ne sint sonora verba consuetudinis, 

; Paulumquo rursus a solutis differanW* 


vouring to avoid the appearance of verse, that 
their dialogue might more nearly resemble com^ 
mon and ordinary conversation, can it be reason- 
ably imagined, that, in the performance, any mode 
of representation should have been adopted, which 
must have inevitably destroyed the resemblance, 
and rendered the supposed copy totally unlike 
the model which they were professedly aiming to 
imitate u ? 

If Comedy was not wholly a musical perform- 
ance throughout, it is evident it could not be so 
partially. The progress of each scene is conducted 
in one uniform tenour, and no possible reason can 
be assigned, from the present appearance of the 
Comedies of Plautus or Terence themselves, why 
one scene, or any part of a scene, should have been 
accompanied with Music, and another, or any part 
of another, performed without. 

* The Italian Opera, whoever was realty its inventor, ancj 
at whatever time it was first introduced, facts, which still re- 
main in dispute, is evidently founded on the erroneous idea that 
the Greek and Latin Tragedies and Comedies were accompa- 
nied, which they were not, with Music throughout; and is, also, 
at the same time ; a full exemplification of the absurdity of such 
a dramatic representation. Nor can the Opera Songs of Handel, 
excellent as they unquestionably are, justify or sanction, by 
their individual merit, a mode of representation, which, at the 
same time, acknowledges, by the introduction of scenery and 
dresses, the principle of representing events in the same man- 
ner as they had really passed, and yet contradicts, by the use 
of a mode of representation which never prevailed on such oc- 
casions, the very idea of all resemblance to the events and per- 
sons which it professes to exhibit. 

W 3 



Tibice, their Nature, 

Doubts have been entertained as to their nature.— In Music 
there can be no more than seven notes. — The whole Musical 
Scale, a succession of these seven notes in a different pitch*, 
—When numbers sing together, they sing in different pitches 
of voice. — A certain pitch of voice natural to every one.— 
Tibiae dextrae et sinistra defined. — Tibiae pares described. — 
Tibiae impares explained. — Tibiae Sarranae, or Serranae, their 
nature inquired into. 

(jtreat doubts have been entertained, by those 
evidently unacquainted with the principles of Mu- 
sic, as to the nature of the Tibise, used on occasion 
of the performance of Terence's Comedies. The 
Andria is said to have been acted c Tibiis paribus 
6 dextris et sinistris x ;' the Eunuch, c Tibiis dua- 
i bus dextris y ;' the Heautontimorumenos, on its 
first performance, ' Tibiis imparibus z ;' on its se- 
cond, f Duabus dextris a ;' the Adelphi, 6 Tibiis 
6 Sarranis b ;' the Hecyra, ' Tibiis paribus c ;' and 
the Phormio, ' Tibiis imparibus d .' 

Every one, in any degree conversant with Mu- 

2 See its title. y See its title. * See its title. 

a See its title. b See its title. c See its title, 

d See its title. 


sic, must necessarily know perfectly well, that the 
whole compass of musical Sounds is comprehended 
in seven notes, and that the whole of the musical 
scale is no other than a multitude of successions 
of these seven notes, though in a different pitch 
of sound. Whenever, therefore, a number of per- 
sons, of different ages and sexes, sing together, 
such, for instance, as boys, women, and men, even 
though they all sing precisely the same tune or 
notes, yet the boys will sing in one pitch, the wo- 
men in another, and the men in a third ; all dif- 
fering from each other, and the only disparity 
among them will be the various degrees of 
acuteness or gravity. The reason for this is, that 
a certain pitch of voice is natural to every one ; 
and in that he can speak or sing with perfect ease 
to himself, and, with the assistance of a nice ear, 
correctly in tune. But, if any one, for the pur- 
pose of accommodating his voice to that of some 
one else, should quit his own natural tone, and 
pitch his voice to the exact tone of voice of that 
other person, which did not suit with his own, he 
would soon perceive he spoke or sung with great 
pain, and in all probability very discordantly. 

TheTibioe Dextrae and Sinistra* were of different 
sizes ; for the largest was as big at the top 5 as the 
smallest was at the bottom : in fact, they were 
formed by cutting the same reed into two ; and 

e * Ex asininis ossibus Theatrales atque argento, Arundineas 
* ex Theophrasto et Plinio. Internodium radici proximum excide= 

N 4 


this circumstance^ as all persons acquainted with 
the nature of musical instruments know, decidedly 
proves that the smaller of the two pipes must have 
been in tone an octave, or eight notes, higher or 
more acute than the larger. Each pipe, therefore, 
in all likelihood, contained, in regular succession, 
a certain number of these sets of seven notes, as 
is the case with all musical instruments whatever 1 : 
The Tibiae Pares were such as were of the same 
pitch, so that, in the case of the Dextrse and Sinis- 
tra?, all the Dextree were of the same pitch, 
though different from the Sinistra?, and all the Si- 
nistra? were of equal pitch with each other, though 
unlike that of the Dextra?> 

' bant ad lsevam Tibiam, quod subesset cacumini ad dextram, 
i Quo laevarum sonum gravem agnoscas, dextrarum acutum. Sic 
' apud veteres scriptum est, at Latini aiunt sinistras acu-* 
' tiores.' — Scaliger De Poetice, lib. i. cap. 20. 

f The author of an anonymous tract in 12mo. in French, 
entitled ' Entretiens su.r l'Etat de la Musique Grecque, vers 
' le Milieu du quatridme Siecle, avant PEre vulgaire,' Amst, 
1777, who seems, though apparently not a musical man, to 
have had some musical intelligence communicated to him, says, 
p. 37, ' La voix, me dit il, ne parcourt pour l'ordinaire que 
' deux octaves et une quinte. Les instruments embrassent une 

* plus grande etendue : nous avons des Flutes qui vont au-dela 

* de la troisieme octave.' And for this last fact, as it seems, 
he cites Aristox. lib. i. p. 20; Euclid, p. 13. Galtruchius, in. 
his < Mathematical totius Institutio,' 12mo. Cantabrig. 1668, 
p. 282, says the same. His words are, ' Nee immerito chordis 

* quindecim systema denniebant, quod videlicet istud solum spa- 

* tium naturali voce a nobis vulgo decurratur. Quanquam et post- 

* modum turn gravioribus turn acutis adjunctee sunt alia?, quag 
' etiara ficta voce quis decantare possit.' 


The Tibise Impaves were such as did not agree 
with each other in pitch ; and the pitch of the 
Tibise Dextrse was., no doubt, as well settled and 
known, as that of the Hautboy or Clarinet, or any 
other musical instrument now is amongst us &. 

As to the Tibiee Sarranae, or Serranse, for it 
is written both ways, the meaning of the appella- 
tion is bv no means settled. Some have thought 
it derived from Sarrha, a city of Phoenicia 1 ', 

s It is, perhaps, necessary to caution the reader against 
supposing that, either in the musical compositions introduced 
between the acts of the Latin Comedies, or in those performed 
by the Chorus in the Greek Tragedies or Comedies, any such 
thing as modern Harmony, or Music in Parts, was introduced : 
on the contrary, they were certainly nothing more than simple 
melodies, and all the several instruments only played the same 
notes, though in a different pitch. Diomedes * De Oratione et 
4 partibus Orationis,' edit. Putsch, col. 489, uses these words : 
' In CKoris, vero, numerus personarum definitus non est, quippe 
i junctim omnes loqui debent, quasi voce confusa, et concen- 

* tuum in unam personam reformantes.' — Nannius, in his 

* Miscellanea,' lib. v. cap. 6, says, * Tres olim partes Comcedia 
'fecit; Canticum, quod duabus Tibiis una persona et ad sum- 
i mam altera constabat ; Chorum, qui jncerto numero persona* 
' rum, sed omnium vocibus in unum sonum confusis utebantur; 

* Diverbium, quod colloquio trium, aut ad summum quatuor, 
< personarum consutum erat.' And, lastly, Seneca, in his 84th 
Epistle, thus speaks on the subject : ' Non vides, inquit, quam 
4 multorum vocibus Chorus constet? Unus tamen ex omnibus 
i sonus redditur ; aliqua gravis, aliqua media. Accedunt viri, 

* fceminae : interponuntur Tibia? j singulorum illic latent voces, 

* omnium apparent.' 

h Among the Notse Historical on the Parian Chronicle, in 
Prideaux, Marmora Oxon. 1676, p. 169, a note by Servius is 
mentioned, respecting Tibiee Serranae, and in which he is repre- 


which some have conceived to be Tyre; and others 
have imagined it referred to Serra, a saw, because, 
as they say, the dancers used to make one step 
forward, and another backward, like sawyers saw- 
ing wood \ No reason can be more destitute of 
probability, or indeed of common sense; for what 
connexion could possibly subsist, between the 
practice of the dancers, which was optional, both 
as to the nature of the steps and the figure, and 
the name of a musical instrument, capable of 
playing, as every such instrument must be, a va- 
riety of tunes of different time and measures? It 
did not even necessarily require to be accompa- 
nied with dancing, but might have been used 
alone, entirely without it, and consequently could 
not prescribe any particular kind of dance or 
form of step, as that, for which it was the best 

sented to have spoken thus : ' Tibia?, porro, inquit, aut Ser- 
4 rana? dicuntur (Sarrana? a Sarra, quae Tyrus est),' &c. 

* ' Deinde apparatus in factis mediis per Tibias Serranas, 

* quae Sinistra? acuminis lenitate jocum Comicum ostendebant ; 
' atque Serranae dicebantur, quoniam Saltatores iisdem referre 

* et proferre pedem ludebantur ; non aliter atque seetores, cum 

* sierra adhibita ligna partiri conantur. Aliis autem a Sarrha, 
' civitate Phoenicia?, easdem dictos volunt, inter quos et Ser- 

* vius.' See Terentius a P. Antesignano, editio secundi exempl. 
8vo. Lugduni, 1560, p. 477, in a note on the title to the Adel- 
phi. The same author, ibid. p. 3, in a note on the title of the 
Andria, says, * Altera? sunt Serranae, sic, arbitror, appeilata?, 

* quoniam iis saltatores et proferre et referre pedem continuo 

* juberentur ; non secus atque seetores, qui serra adacta partiri 

* ligna conantur. Siquidem Pompeius ait Serram, id praelium 
€ dici, quo frequenter acies et accedere et recedere soleret/ 


adapted. If the Instrument were constructed with 
any kind of valve, indented like a saw, that might 
have been a reason deduced from the form of the 
instrument itself. But why any such valve, if it 
had any, as it probably might, should have been 
thus indented, it is difficult to assign any reason- 
able cause ; though, without some such ground, 
the etymology from Serra, a saw, cannot be sup- 

If, however, the adjective Serranae be rightly 
thus spelt, and not Sarrhanse, as it is also equally 
given, it is certain that it could not be derived 
from Sarrha, the city in Phoenicia. Nor is there 
any foundation, in that case, for supposing that 
it was really formed from any proper name what- 
ever, either of any person or place. In that event, 
flutes of this kind, if they had, as they very likely 
might, any such valve, to open and shut, like the 
modern German flute, might very probably and 
properly be called Serranse, an appellation derived 
from the verb Sero, claudere, to lock or close ; in 
the same manner as the adjective Seranus or Ser- 
ranus was actually formed from the verb Sero, to 
sow, in the case of Attilius, a Roman senator, 
mentioned by Pliny, book xviii. chap. 3 k . 

k ' Serentem invenerunt dati honores, Serranum unde cog- 
c nomen.' Plinii Nat. Hist. lib. xviii. c. 3. — In a note in the 
folio edition, Genevan, 1631, are these words, referring to the 
word Serranum, in the above passage : t C. Attilius is fuit, ab 
* aratro accersitus ad consulatum, qui collega Cn. Cornelio 


* pugnavit cum Pcenis, et de iis triumphavlt. Cicero pro Ros- 

* cio, et in Catone, Valer. Max. libr. iv. cap. 4, Apuleius, in 

* Apologia, Servius, nulla historiae fide, Dictatorem fuigse 
« tradit. Virgilius 

" et te sulco, Serrane, serentem." 

* Sertor dictus, qui per sationem natus, autore Probo.' — PHnii 
Nat. Hist. Genevse, 1631, p. 369, 



Particulars respecting the first Publication of 
Plautus and Terence. 

Schmeider's account of the first publication of Plautus, from a 
manuscript at Florence.-— He n'as stated incorrectly a passage 
from the Preface. — Remarks on what he has said, and on 
the passage itself. — Pareus, his account of a manuscript of 
Plautus, in the Palatine Library. — Remarks on his accounts 
—First printed edition of Terence, when published. — Pro- 
bably printed from a manuscript in the Vatican Library, 
corrected by Calliopius. — This manuscript of Charlemagne's 
time. — Not known whether it was in verse. — Fabricius says f 
the earliest editions of Terence were in prose. — Regulation 
of the verses in the printed edit, of 1479 and 14-99, very 
faulty. — A manuscript of Terence, supposed, by Fabricius, 
of the seventh century.— Not known whether that was in 
verse or prose. 

Schmeider, in the Preface to his edition of Plau- 
tus, 8vo. Gottingioe, 1804, p. 15, speaking c De 
' editionibus Plauti,' says, that the earliest edition 
of the Comedies of Plautus was published by 
George Merula, from a manuscript at Florence, 
and printed at Venice in 1472 l \ and he observes, 

1 Jean de la Cuille, a printer and bookseller of Paris, has y 
in his ' Histoire de lTmprimerie, et de la Librairie/ 4to. Paris r 
1689, mentioned, p. 20, that Printing was carried to Venice by 


further, that Merula had said, in the Preface, that 
all the copies extant, were derived from one copy 3 
and that, for that reason, the correction of Plant us 
was difficult m . The substance of the passage in 
Merula's Preface is not given by Schmeider with 
sufficient accuracy ; for, after mentioning the mul- 
titude of corruptions, and the difficulty of remov- 
ing them, which he compares to the labours of 
Hercules, Merula says, i In addition to all these, 
6 there was but one book, from which, as an arche- 
' type, all the copies, which could be procured, 
< were derived; and, if this book,' says he, 'could, 
' by any method, have been gotten into my hands, 

* the Bacchides, Mostellaria, Mencechmi, Miles, 

* and Mercator, might, perhaps, have been ren- 
: dered more correct ; for the books which were 

Jean Windelinus of Spire, who printed * Ciceronis Epistolae ad 

* Faniiliares' there, in 1469; and, enumerating the books printed 
by his brother there, after his death, which happened in 1470, 
De la Cuille notices ' Plauti Comcedise, in folio, 1472.' ' Plauti 
4 Comcediae xx primura e Ms. Florentino prodiere Venetiis, 
4 Opera et impendio Joannis de Colonia, Agrippinensis, et Vin- 

* delini de Spira A. 1472, fol., cura Georgii Merulae Alexan- 
« drini, Statielensis, et inde, Tarvisii, 1482, fol., opera et im- 

* pendio Pauli de Ferraria, atque Dionysii de Bononia.' Fa~ 
bricii Biblioth. Lat. edit. Ernesti, 8vo. Lipsiae, 1773, vol. i. 
p. 15. 

m Schmeider's words are these : < Comcediae Plauti primum 
' prodiere e Ms. Florentino Venetiis, 1472, cura Georgii Me- 
' rulae, qui in prasfatione dicit, omnia exempla Plauti quse ex- 
1 stent ab uno exemplari ducta esse, eamque ob causam Plauti 

* correctionem esse difficilem.' — Schmeider's Preface to his edi- 
tion of Plautus, 8vo. Gottingice, 1804, p. 15. 


f used in revising these, were transcribed from 
6 corrupt copies. But the last seven Comedies, as 
' I happened to meet with copies which were not 
6 corrupted and tampered with by the critics, al- 
c though they were faulty, will be found much 
c more correct u .' 

What Merula has said, must be evidently un- 
derstood as confined to the copies he used, and 
not extended, as Schm eider has erroneously con- 
ceived it, to all the copies in existence. But still 
the whole passage is a mass of confusion and con- 
tradiction. If the copies he had were all trans- 
cribed from that which he wished to procure, what 
hope could he entertain of assistance from it ? be- 

n * His omnibus accedit, unum tantum fuisse librum, a quo, 
c velut archetypo, omnia deducta sunt, quae habentur exempla, 
i qui si in manus nostras aliqua via venire potuisset, Bacchides, 
' Mostellaria, Mencechmi, Miles, atque Mercator, emendatiores 
4 sane haberentur. Namque, in his recognoscendis, libros contu- 

* limus de corruptis exemplaribus faetos. At septem ultimse, ut 
6 in eas incidimus, quse simplices, et intactas a censoribus, fuerant, 

* quanquam mendosas forent, multo veriores erunt.' See the 
letter or address, by way of dedication, from Georgius Alexan- 
drinus, to Jacobus Zeno, bishop of Pavia, as it stands reprinted 
in the small quarto edition of Plautus, published by Eusebius 
Scutari, and printed at Venice, 3495, die xxiii. Novembris, (fo. 
a. ii. b.) From a letter of Eusebius Scutarius Vercellensis, ad- 
dressed * Georgio Merulae Alexandrino,' which occurs at the 
end of the book, it appears that the above Georgius Alexan- 
drinus was this same George Merula ; and, in this letter, Scu- 
tari addresses Merula by the appellation of * prudentissime 
4 praeceptor,' and speaks of the revision of Plautus, which Scu- 
tari had then accomplished, as enjoined him by Merula, who, 
from the above circumstances, was certainly his schoolmaster. 

192 an iNaumv mto 

cause he could not tell whether the errors h6 had 
found were corruptions of the transcribers, or 
faults in the original manuscript : or, how could 
he know that his copies were transcripts, without 
an actual collation ? which, as he could not pro- 
cure access to the original, seems to have been 
impossible ; for the power or opportunity of col- 
lating it, would have fully answered his purpose; 
and he could have had no reason to regret, as 
he does, his inability to procure it. His expecta- 
tions of assistance from it, arose from his hopes 
that he should find in it variations from the copies 
he used ; an idea not consistent with that of sup* 
posing his copies transcripts. Nay, he directly 
contradicts himself; for he afterwards says, that 
the copies he used were made from corrupt ori- 
ginals, which at least proves that those copies 
were not taken from the archetype he speaks of, 
No more, therefore, can be understood from this 
passage, than that, if he could have procured a 
copy, which was out of his power, it might have 
been serviceable to him ; but, as to its being what 
he says it was, the archetype of the rest, he ap- 
pears to have had no ground from any circum- 
stance, nor any reason for thinking it really so ; 
and what he himself says, entirely contradicts the 
idea. This, however, is certain, that he could 
not obtain the book, wherever it was, which he has 
not mentioned, and consequently he has not used 
it, so that the manuscript, from which he printed^ 
was a different one, 


Pareus speaks of a manuscript of Plautus, of 
great antiquity and authenticity, which lie himself 
saw and used in the Palatine Library. Of its 
early history he has given no particulars, as he 
only says, that, in 1512, it was given to Vitus 
Veslerus, but he does not mention by whom ; that 
it was afterwards given, by Michael Kotingiiis, to 
Camerarius, without stating how it became the 
property of Rotingius ; and that Camerarius gave 
it to the Palatine Library, which it is well known 
was afterwards removed from Heidelberg to the 
Vatican at Rome . 

Parens' s account of this manuscript is singu- 
larly quaint and pedantic, and exhibits a feeble 
and injudicious attempt to give a forced additional 
value to a document of acknowledged authenticity, 
which, of course, needed no such assistance ; for, 
he says that, for the purpose of publishing his edi- 
tion, he had consulted manuscripts, particularly 
some in the Palatine Library ; and, amongst these 
books, says he, ' that is entitled to the palm, an 
6 older than which the learned have always been of 
' opinion is not existing in Europe, and which the 
' most learned men have in all respects held in 
6 equal estimation with the Florentine Pandects 

* themselves. He says, further, that, without this 

* manuscript, Plautus' s Comedies must have been 

° On the taking of Heidelberg, by the Count de Tilly, in 
1622, this library was sent to Rome. Moreri's Diet, on the au- 
thority of Bertius, Comment. Germ. 



' given up, for that it not obscurely appeared, that 
< it was transcribed from some copy, which fol- 
• lowed the hand- writing- of an ancient book of 
6 the first writer, written with capital letters, ac- 
6 cording to the Roman manner p.' 

All manuscripts' must be in their very nature 
supposed to have been originally derived, either 
more or less remotely, and through the medium 

* Parens uses these words: ' Libros vero illos manuscriptos, 

* quibus usus fui, ex Regia et Qftpi£ofi<r» (at, pr oh dolor, militari 
s ferocia postmodum triste facta spolium) Bibliotheca Palatina, 
' Serenissimus Princeps Elector, pro innata sua in viros doctos 

* litterasque adeo universa dementia, prepense satis suppe- 

* ditavif. Inter eos autem codices palmam obtinet is, quo in 
4 Europa antiquiorem nullum exstare consentiens semper doc- 

* torum fuit opinio, quemque, omni suo merito, ipsis Pandectis 
i Florentines sequipararant viri doctissimi/ — See the Preface to 
Pareus's edition of Plautus, edit. 8vo. Francof. 1641. And, 
further on, he says r speaking of the same manuscript, « Pre- 

* tiosas istas membranas, y.a,r e|o^v rtya, in Animadversionibus 

* nostris Veterem Codicem appellare soleo, hac nota V, C. Abs- 

* que hoc solo namque fuisset conclamatum jam foret de Co- 

* mcediis Plautinis. Non obscure etiam apparuit, descriptum 

* ilium fuisse ex antigrapho quodam, qui sequutus fuerit scrip- 

* turam manuariam veteris protographi libri, majusculis litteris 

* more Romano exarati. Quae quidem ratio effecit, ut in edi- 

* tione nostra consulto nonnullibi, quanquam parcus, antiquam 

* Umbricse cum maxime dialecto, aut essteroquin personis sce- 

* nicis congruam scripturam, contra Tulgatos Grammaticorum 

* canones in litterarum quarundam ptTaroycuwrto expresserim, 

* quam non solum anxie commendarunt veteres Grammatici, 
' sed et, summa Telut religione, studiose observarunt Juris Ci- 
i vilis- interpretes celeberrimi, in editione Pandectarum, ex Pi-. 

* sanzs suis ehirographis, a quibus nefas ferme ducebant reca- 
4 dere,' — Preface to Pareus's Plautus, 



of fewer or more numerous transcriptions, in pro- 
portion to their age, from the original manuscript 
of the author. No circumstance is stated by Pa- 
rens, as the ground of his opinion, which, after 
all, seems no better than a mere conjecture or 
guess, that the manuscript was a transcript from 
one which had also been itself transcribed from a 
manuscript of the author himself, or at least his 
amanuensis, in capital letters. The whole, there- 
fore, of what he says, amounts to no more than 
this, that the manuscript of which he speaks was 
old, and he supposed it to have been copied from 
one still older ; but of what kind this latter one 
was, it was impossible he could know. This every 
one would necessarily have concluded, without be- 
ing expressly told so by him ; and no intelligence is 
gained from this affectation of delivering an opinion, 
which, after all, amounts to nothing decisive ; for 
the value of the manuscript must still be computed 
from the acknowledged sentiments of the learned, 
as to its own age, as it would always have been, 
if Parens had never written. He has not, how- 
ever, informed his reader, whether the manuscript 
was in verse or prose — a very important point of 
intelligence, which has not been in general com- 
municated, as it always ought to have been on such 
occasions, by the editors of Plant us and Terence. 

The first printed edition of Terence is believed 
to have been without a date. Hare, in his c Ta- 
* bula Literarum,' prefixed to his Terence, speaks 

o 2 


of one printed in 1471 q ; of another, in 1474; 
and a third, in 1478 ; but he also mentions a very 
ancient edition, printed by Angel. Sabinus, without 
place or date ; and two others, without place or 
date, or name of the printer. To none of these 
undated ones has he used any efforts to assign any 
date ; nor has he said, whether they were in verse 
or in prose. Fabricius mentions an edition of Te- 
rence, published at Tarvisium (Trevisa), in 1474, 
of which he says that he can find none older, 
excepting one, which he notices, without a date. 
He remarks, also, in a note, on the authority of 
Cornelius Beughem, that the first editions of Te- 
rence were without any division of verses r . The 

i Jean de la Cuille, a printer and bookseller of Paris men- 
tioned in a former note, has, in his * Histoire de ITmprimerie, 

* et de la Librairie,' 4to. Paris, 1689, p. 16, spoken of Rome as 
one of the first places where the art of Printing was introduced, 
about the year 1467, by Conrad Suvenhein and Arnold Pan- 
nartz, who lodged in the house of Peter and Francis Maximis; 
and, among other books, printed there by them, he mentions 

* Terentii Comcedise,' in folio, 1472, 

r Fabricii Bibliotheca Latina, Hamb. 1721, vol. i. p. 34, 
The note alluded to in the text is in these words: * Cornel, 
6 Beughem, in Incunabulis Typogr. pag. 132, Observa, primas 

* Terentii editiones destitui versuum distinctione.' Ernestus, 
in his edition of * Fabricii Bibliothec. Lat.' edit. 8vo. Lipsiae, 
vol. i. p, 53, says, speaking of the editions of Terence, ' An- 
4 tiquissimse editiones sunt, quse versuum distinctionem nondum 
& liabent. Talis est una, quam habuit nuper Consultissimus in 
4 civitate Lips. Vir Christianus, Ludov. Stiglitius, forma qua* 
4 terna majore, Uteris Germanicis; altera, quae sine loci et anni 

* indicio edita, literis vetustissimis expressa, profitetur se ab 


iirst edition, whenever and wherever it appeared, 
was probably printed from a manuscript in the 
Vatican Library, which Fabricius has described 
as written by Hrodogenes, in the time of Charle- 

1 Angelo Sabino purgatum, qui et alia, primis inventae typo- 
' graphias temporibus, edidit Roinse, ut Paradoxa in Juvenal. 
' a. 1474-, etc. Hoc an conveniat in editionem qua3 fuit in BibL 

* Gudiana cum Donato, sine loco et anno, nescio. Gudius 
' quidem typos Romanos Panartii videbatur sibi agnoscere. No- 
f tatam etiam vidimus in Catalogo Bibl. Senkenbergianae edi- 
4 tionem, quae anni et loci nota careret, ceterum sub titulo 
" Terentius in sua metra redactus," quae tamen antiquior sit 
' necesse est, quando in edd. 1487, 90, 92, jam metrjs incedit 

* Terentius,, Itaque male vidimus, qui judiearet in edit. Ar- 

* gentin. 1503, metrum demum notatum fuisse, quod in ea est 

* epigramma in contemtum earum editionum in quibus sine ver- 
' jsuum distinctione sunt Comcediae Terentii. In Benedicti Phi- 

* lologi Flor. praefatione ad P. Crinitum, edit. Argent. 1516, 

* repetita ex Italica editione, dicitur, " Politianus primus ag- 
<* gressus esse emendare Terentium et in suos numeros referre." 
i Sed et ipsum se dicit in ea re elaborasse. Post antiquissimos, 

* quas cum forma folii exeusas sine loci temporisque nota me- 

* moravimus supra, nullum reperi antiquiorem Terentii editio- 
i nem, Mediolanensi, 1470, per Antonium Zarotum impendio 

* Jo. Lognani, cum Donato in Terentium ; et Romanam, anno 
i 1472, fol. per Conradum Sveinhemium, et Arnoldum Pan- 
i narta. Hanc sequitur Tarvisiana, an. 1474, fol. turn Veneta, 
6 a. 1476, cum Donati, et in Heautontimorumenon Jo. Cal- 
' purnii commentariis.' — He then notices the following editions : 
Tarvisiae, 1477? foL ; Parma, 1180, fol.; another (different from 
the former Tarvisian impression) Tarvisiae, 1477, fol. ; Mediol. 
1478; Venet, 1479; Venet. 1482, 1487, "fol.; Venet. 1480; 
Naples, 1481, fol.; Mediol. et Venet. 1483, fol.; Venet. 1488, 
1490, 1492, 1494, 1567, and 1580, in fol. &c. ; Argent. 1496, 
1499. After this, follows a long list of editions in the sixteenth 
century, and later, which it is here useless to enumerate? 

o 3 


magne, and revised by Calliopius". Certain it is, 
that, in the edition of Terence, printed at Venice by 
Nicholas Girardengus, revised by Francis Diana in 
the year 1479, 15 December, which was probably; 
in that respect, copied from the former impressions, 
each play finishes with the words c Calliopitis re- 

< censm,' there given as part of the text; and 
these words have been continued in the Delphin 
edition, though properly separated from the rest K 

5 The description of this manuscript given by Fabricius, is 
In the following words : < In Bibliotheca etiam Vaticana, jam- 

* pridem asservatur Celebris alter Codex Terentii, Georgio Fabri- 
6 cio olim inspectus, qui sevo Caroli Magni, quidam Hrodogenes 

* scripsit, et Calliopius Scholasticus recensuit, ut post singulas 

* Comoedias apparet. Scholasticus hac aetate erat dignitas Ec- 

* clesiastica eorum, qui Scholiis praeerant Ecclesiasticis, ut 

* docet Cangius, in Glossario Latino.' Fabricii Bibl. Lat. edit. 
1721, vol. i. p. 32. — Ernestus, in his edition of that work, 
omits all of the above passage, after the word 'apparet;' instead 
of which, he thus proceeds: ' Sed alia exempla Mss. passim 

* reperta sunt, ut in Bibl. Londinensi, Oxoniensi, Leidensi, Er- 

* langensi, etc. Nam pfopter frequentem usum in scholis, sae- 
6 pissime descriptae sunt hae Comcediae. Atque haec multitudo 

* librorum peperit multitudinem lectionum variantium. Nam 
' Richardus Bentleius, in parte prima Observationum Anglica 
i editarum Lingua, adversus AntoiiiiCollinii libellum proLicentia 

< Cogitandi vulgatum, pag. 66± testatur se, collatis variis Codi- 

* cibus, notasse farraginem variarum lectionum ad vicies mille.* 
—Fabricii Bibl. Lat. edit. Ernesti, 8vo. Lipsiae, 1773, vol. i. 
p. 53. 

1 It will be seen, in a subsequent Section, number XXIV. of 
this work, inserted for the express and necessary purpose of ex- 
plaining the nature and degree of authority to which manu- 
scripts may be entitled, a subject, though of great importance, 
yet but little understood, that it was the practice to revise and 
correct manuscripts after they were written. The methods em« 


As Charlemagne's reign commenced in the year 
800, and terminated in 814 u , it is clear, that this 
manuscript could not foe of an earlier., or indeed 
later date, than the beginning of the ninth cen- 
tury; but whether it is in verse or prose, is no 
where noticed, though,, as Fabricius has above 
said, that the early editions were in prose, it is 
most likely., that the manuscript from which the 
first was printed was m prose also. If it was in 
verse, it must have been very ill divided, as the 
edition of 1479 {and the same may be said of 
another,, printed at Venice, by Lazarus de Soardis, 
in 1499) is extremely faulty in that respect, 
though some endeavours, it is plain, had been 
made to correct them, as those of 1479 and 1499 
differ from each other* 

Another manuscript of Terence, in the Vatican 
Library, and which formerly belonged to Peter 
Bembus, is also noticed by Fabricius. This Poli- 
tian had seen, and probably used in his revision of 
Terence ; for in the manuscript itself is a note, in 
the hand-writing of Politian, in which he says he 
had never seen one more ancient. Its age, when 
Fabricius wrote, in 1698, was, as that author 

ployed for this purpose, will also be there found distinctly stat- 
ed, without a knowledge of which no man can be competent to 
decide as to what was meant to stand or be rejected. 

u Saxii Onomasticon Literarium, 8yo. Trajecti ad Rhenum^ 
1759, p. 41. 

9 4 


says, more than a thousand years'; but on what 
lie founded that opinion he has not mentioned. 

x Of this manuscript Fabricius thus speaks : * Antiquissi- 
? mum Comediarum Terentii Codicem olim habuit Petrus Bern- 

* bus, exaratum ante annos amplius mille, cui Politianus haec 

* verba manu sua inscripsit, " Ego, Angelus Politianus, homo 
<4 vetustatis minime incuriosus, nullum me vidisse ad banc diem 
*' Codicem vetustiorem fateor." Hie, ab illo tempore, pervenit 
4 in manus Fulvii Ursini, qui, dum vixit, auro quovis pretiosio- 
4 rem habuit, et moriens Bibliothecae legavit Vaticanae, ut re- 

* ferunt Janus Nicius Erythrseus, Pinacotheca, 1. p. 10, et Leo 

* Allatius, Animadvers. ad Antiquitates Hetruscas, p. 59. Fran- 
' ciscus vero Cardinalis Toletus, qui Ursinum cum vetusto suo 

* libro usque adeo derisit, nescio an multo fecit elegantius, 

* quam Hadrianus VI. summus pontifex, a quo viros literatos et 

* humaniori doctrina? deditos per contemptum dictos Teren- 

* tianos narrat Jo. Pierius Valerianus, De Infelicitate Literato- 

* rum, libro ii.' Fabricii Bibl. Lat. vol. i. p. 31.— The dedica- 
tion to the first volume of this work of Fabricius is dated in 
1696. Ernestus, in his edition of Fabricius, vol. i. p. 50, makes 
an addition to the above article, in these words : * Specimen 

* codicjs hujus Terentii dedit Jo. Mabillonius, C. V. de Re Di- 

* plom. p. 354, v. et in Nouveau Traite Diplom. t. iii. tab, 35. 

* Hie est iste liber Petri Bembi, quern laudat Muretus, pag. 189, 

* b. ad T erentium. " Sed in libro Bembi, non tantum, ut in aliis, 
" exercerent legitur, verum etiam adscripta est ad latus expli- 
iC catio (|U5edam hujus vocis, quae scripturae illius integritatem 
" confirmet. Multiim autem ejus libri valere debet auctoritas, 
" est enim ita antiquus, ut Angelus Politianus, qui multos ve» 
" teres libros viderat, testatus est omnium, cujusque generis, 
C{ librorum, quos ipse unquam vidisset, eum sibi antiquissimum 
" vjcleri." Petrus Victorinus, ix. 15. Var. Lect. ubi Menandri 
4 ioca quaedam confert cum Terentianis, addit domi se habere 
6 Terentium, collatum cum illo Bembi codice manu Angeli Po- 
« litiani, vide de hoc Cod. Nouveau Tr. Dipl. 1. c. p. 50, seq. ubi 
' de aetate ejus disputatur, quam auctores seculum quartum aup 
f quintum non excedere judicant.' — Fabricius wrote in 1696 5 


nor has he noticed whether it was in verse or 
J) rose. Faernus is said, by Bishop Hare, to have 
used that and another manuscript in the Vatican 
Library}', which last is probably that revised by 
Calliopius. If Fabricius is correct in his opinion, 
as to the antiquity of this manuscript, it must 
have been written, at the latest, before the year 
696, and consequently more than a century prior 
to that revised by Calliopius. 

and, deducting one thousand years for the age of the manu- 
script, it must have been written in 696, which is the seventh 
century. If the manuscript is, as Ernestns here says, of the 
fourth or fifth century, it is at least two, or perhaps three cen- 
turies older than Fabricius has made it, and at least four, or 
perhaps five centuries more ancient than that of Calliopius, 
which was not written till the beginning of the ninth. 

y See the * Tabula Literarum, quibus designantur Codices 
4 Mss. et Editt. vett.' prefixed to Bishop Hare's edition of Te- 
rence. In this list he speaks of four manuscripts, as used by 
Faernus, which he describes as follows : 

i Bemb. -\ 

e v r Sunt e codd. quibus usus est Faernus.' 

« Victor. * 

Of these, the first is evidently Peter Bembus's manuscript, 
mentioned in a former note. Of the Basil Ms. nothing is 
known. The third is, probably, that of Calliopius, also de- 
scribed in a former note : and the fourth seems that possessed 
by Peter Victorinus, which he speaks of, as having been collated 
by Politian with that formerly belonging to Peter Bembus, 



pivislon of the Verses in Terence, as it at present 
stands, but comparatively of modern Date, and 
manifestly very corrupt in itself 

Manuscripts searched on this point, on the present occasion.- 
The earliest of Terence are two of the tenth, and one of 
the eleventh century. — These are all in prose. — Two, afc 
least, of them, if not the third, contain a Preface, in which 
Terence is said to be in verse.— A mistake in the Preface, 
in supposing Calliopius contemporary with Terence. — No 
manuscript of Terence in verse, earlier than the thirteenth 
century, has been found. — One of the thirteenth, another 
of the fourteenth, another of the fifteenth centuries, in 
verse.— Their regulation no better than that of the printed 
editions of 1479 and 1499. — No one gives a mode of divi- 
sion that can be followed throughout, — In detached places, 
they may each suggest a more correct distribution. — Inter- 
val of time between dates of the oldest manuscripts, and 
the time when Plautus and Terence lived. — Copies corrupt 
in Varro's time. — Politian began to revise Terence, as to 
distribution of verses.— On his death before he had finished 
it, Benedictus of Florence completed it. — The result pub- 
lished by this latter, in 1505, and again, in 1519. — This ar- 
rangement followed by H. Stephens in 1529. — And by Eras- 
mus, no doubt, on the authority of Priscian. — The accu- 
racy of the division doubtful.— Benedictus has mistaken two 
passages in Aristotle. 

Endeavours have been used 5 on the present occa- 
sion, by consulting such early manuscripts as were 


accessible, and the age of which could be satis- 
factorily authenticated, to ascertain the state of 
the text of Terence, as far back as possible ; but 
of Plautus, the manuscripts were not numerous, 
and those which have been found, are only of a 
very late date. The earliest of Terence consist of 
two of the tenth, and one of the eleventh century, 
all three in the Harleian Collection in the British 
Museum 2 ; and the ages of them all are ascer- 

1 The manuscripts here alluded to, are In the Harleian Col- 
lection, and are numbered 2670, 2750, and 5443. Mr. Wanley 
says, the two first are of the tenth century, and the latter of 
the eleventh. See the Catalogue of that Collection in two vo- 
lumes, folio, printed at London, 1759. All of these are inprosa, 
In the same Harleian Collection were also found three manu- 
scripts in verse. The first, numbered 2524, was described, in 
the above-mentioned Catalogue, as of the thirteenth century; 
the second, 2525, of the fourteenth ; and the third, 2528, of 
the fifteenth ; and, indeed, this last has the date 1496 to it. 
Specimens from each of these, compared also with the printed 
editions of 1479 and 1499, will be found in Section XVII. of 
this Inquiry. Upon consulting the new Catalogue of the Har- 
leian Collection, published under the authority of the Record 
Commission, the following manuscripts of Terence, in that 
Collection, are found to be noticed as being in prose : 

2456, prose, of the 14th cen- 

2475, prose.,.., 13th. 

2527, prose .„ , ... 15th. 

2562, prose 14th. 

2572, prose 15th. 

2614, prose...... 15th. 

The editor of this last Catalogue disputes, without saying oii 
what ground, the age which had been assigned to No. 5443, 
above mentioned. He says, it is not of the 11th, but of the 13th 

2656, prose, 

2671, prose, 
2689, prose. 
5000, prose. 

of the 12th cen- 

..,. 10th. 


5224, prose . 
5304, prose . 




tained by Mr. Wanley, who drew up the Cata- 
logue, a man, against whose judgment, on such 
subjects, every real scholar already knows, no just 
exception can be taken. In each of these, the 
text is given throughout as prose, notwithstanding 
that, in two of them at least, and perhaps in the 
other, which was accidentally omitted to be con- 
sulted as to that point, there is a Life of Terence, 
in which it is positively asserted, that Terence is 
verse; and, on the authority of Priscian,who is there 
cited, the kind of verse is affirmed to be Iambic, 
without noticing of what length a . Whether the 
omission to give the text as verse, after this plain 
confession, proceeded, as it most probably did, from 

century; and that No. 5000, above, which had been described in 
the former Catalogue, as of the 15th century, is of the 13th in- 
stead, And it is not improbable, could all the manuscripts in 
existence be consulted, that the majority of them would be found 
to be in prose ; a circumstance which very much tends to shake 
the authority of the present division into verse. 

a In the manuscript, No, 5443, this passage stands thus; 
1 Qui autem putant fabulas ipsius non constare metrica ratione, 

* mentiuntur, Quum Prisciarms et alii auctores, in suis volu- 

* minibus, hoc demonstrant, etiam exemplum q promunt, 
i ex eo demonstrat cujus generis metri constant. Ipse autem 
1 Terentius, in prologo primae fabulas, se nominat, dicens poe- 
' tarn, " Poeta cum primum." Constant enim carmina illius 
1 Iambico metro.' In the manuscript, No. 2750, the passage is 
this : ' Qui autem putant fabulas ipsius non stare metrica arte, 

* mentiuntur ■ quum Priscianus et alii auctores, in suis volumi- 
4 nibus, hoc demonstrant etiam et exempla quod promunt ex 

* eo demonstrat cujus metri constat. Ipse autem Terentius, in 
' prologo primae fabulae, se nominal, dicens poetam, Poeta, 

* cum primum. Constant enim carmina illius Iambico metro.' 


the insuperable impediments found on an actual 
attempt to reduce the text into metre, according 
to the usual idea of the standard above mentioned, 
is not decidedly known. This, however, was ap- 
parently the most probable cause ; but the judg- 
ment and information possessed by the author of 
that Life, cannot be relied on, because he ima- 
gines, in another part of it, that Calliopius, a 
grammarian, who, if Fabricius is right in his idea 
as to the age of the manuscript revised by this 
person b , could not have lived earlier than the 
time of Charlemagne, at the beginning of the 
ninth century, and revised the works of Terence, 
was an actor, contemporary, and friend of Terence, 
by whose advice he profited much in the conduct 
of his Dramas c . 

No manuscript in verse, of an earlier date 
than the 13th century d , has occurred on this oc- 
casion ; and in those of that and the 14th e and 
1 5th centuries f , which represent the Comedies a3 

b See the preceding Section. 

c * Recitator vero istarum fabularum non ipse Teremius ex- 

* titit, sed Calliopius quidam, vir clarissimus, ac sapientissimus, 

* cujus opere et sustentatione ac etiam familiaritate tuebatur.* 
Ms. 5443. This manuscript, though written as prose, has, in 
some parts, indications by marks like the capital Greek Gamma, 
where each verse ends ; but this division is evidently made 
since the manuscript was copied ; besides which, it is not con- 
tinued throughout, as it has not been found lower than Act II, 
5c. 2, of the Hecyra. 

d Harleian Manuscript, No, 2524. 

e Idem, 2525. f Idem, 2526. 


verse, the regulation is no better, nor more to be 
confided in, than that which occurs in the early 
prroted editions of 1479 and 1499, and in many 
others. No one of them gives a mode of division 
which can be followed throughout, though in de- 
tached places, especially where they differ from 
the later printed editions, they will each, in differ- 
ent parts, frequently suggest a distribution that 
may lead to a more correct arrangement. 

Allowing the manuscript of Plautus, mention- 
ed by Parens, to be, as he states it, of equal age 
with the Florentine Pandect, and consequently of 
the sixth century s ; and the manuscript of Te- 
rence, in which Politian had written his opinion, 
to be, according to Fabricius's idea, of the se- 
venth h ; there must have been an interval of, at 

s Of this manuscript, the following are all the particulars 
now recoverable. It was found at the taking of Amalfi, by the 
Emperor Lotharius II. in 1130, and by him given to the Pisans, 
from which circumstance the character in which it is written 
has acquired the appellation of Litera Pisana ; but Pisa having 
been afterwards taken, after a long siege, it was transmitted to 
Florence, and placed in the Grand Duke's library. See a pas- 
sage from Gravinae Origines Juris Civilis, lib. i. cap. 140, and 
also one from Keineccii Historia Juris Civilis, lib. i. sect. 412, 
inserted in Dr. Harris's * Brief Account of the Rise and Progress 
' of the Roman Law,' prefixed to his edition of Justinian. A 
fac-simile specimen of it, which is there given, as of the sixth 
century, occurs in Mabillon * De Re Diplomatica,' edit, fo, 
Kapoli, 1789, vol. i. p. 372. A specimen of it, p. 109, and a 
great deal of curious matter, respecting it and its history, may 
be found in * Brencmanni Historia Pandectarum/ 4to* Traject. 
-ad Rhenum, 1722, throughout. 

h See the preceding Section, 


least, between seven and eight centuries from the 
death of Plant us i to the event of the writing of 
that manuscript of his works, and not less than 
nearly between eight and nine, from the writing 
the manuscript of Terence, to the time when Te- 
rence flourished k . Varro, even in his time, which 
was about 61 or 57 years before our Saviour 1 , says, 
that the copies of Terence then existing, were ex- 
ceedingly corrupt m ; and no one who consults the 

1 Plautus lived 189 years before our Saviour. Saxii Ono~ 
mast. Lit. p. 11. Ibid. vol. i. p. 122. He died 184 years be- 
fore our Saviour. Moreri's Diet, and the authorities he eites, 
Lilius Giraldus, De Poetarum Historia, col. 415, says he died 
in the 145th Olympiad. 

k Terence lived 164 years before our Saviour. Onomast. 
Lit. p. 11. He died 159 years before our Saviour. Moreri. — ■ 
Terence flourished 164 years before our Saviour, and in the 
year of Rome 595 (which is 156 before our Saviour, Helviei 
Chron. p. 77) published his Andria. Saxius, Onomast. vol. i. 
p. 127. 

1 Saxius, vol. i. p. 162, 153, 164. Varro was born in the 
first year of the 166th Olympiad, and died at the age of near 
90, in the first year of the 188th. Konigii Bibl. p. 831. 

m See Camerarius's edition of Plautus, in his * Epistola 

* Nuncupatoria,' p. 17, where he says, that Varro complains of 
the inaccuracy of the copies in his time. Dr. J. Carey, of 
Islington, in his * Latin Prosody made easy/ first edit. 8vo* 
p. 128, says, ' We learn from A. Geiiius, that, so far back as 
*. seventeen hundred years ago, the writings of the Romao 
4 Classics were already corrupted and falsified, not only by the 
■* casual errors of copyists, but by the deliberate perversions of 

* mistaken critics ("falsi et audaces emendatores," lib. ii. 14), 
4 who boldly altered every thing that was too elegant or exqui- 
4 site for their own unrefined taste/ 


earliest printed editions of those authors, Platitus 
and Terence, published, as they were from manu- 
scripts of a still later period, can fail of being con- 
vinced, that they are entitled to very little consi- 
deration ; and can never be received as evidence 
of a mode of division into verse, or of a system of 
versification which perpetually contradicts every 
rule of Prosodia. 

Fully sensible ? as indeed every one must be^ 
who considers the subject, of the erroneous regu- 
lation and division of the verses of Terence, as ex- 
hibited in the manuscripts and early printed edi- 
tions, though without adequate knowledge how 
to correct them, Politian had, at one time, under- 
taken to revise and amend the regulation. His 
intended guide in his progress was, in part, no 
doubt, the manuscript of which he appears to have 
entertained so high an opinion n a and which, even 
if it were in prose, a fact which does not appear one 
way or the other, might yet have afforded different 
readings of the text. But the rules of Metre, by 
which he proposed to steer, were probably the 
sentiments and opinions of Priscian, delivered in 
his tract 6 De Versibus Comicis/ which makes a 
part of his works, and is to be found among the 
Latin Grammarians published by Putschius, col. 
1319. He had already commenced, and made 
some progress in the undertaking ; but, dying in 

n See the preceding Section, 


the year 1494 °, before it was completed, Bene- 
dictus of Florence, a philologist, as he calls him- 
self, took up the scheme, and finished it ; the 
result of which he published, when completed, as 
arranged partly by Politian, and the remainder by 
himself, in a duodecimo volume, printed at Flo- 
rence, 1505, with the title of c Terentius Poeta 
' Comicus in sua Metra restitutus ;' a subsequent 
edition of which, with the same title, afterwards 
appeared at Strasbourg, in small quarto, in 15 19 p. 
The text, as thus divided and arranged, seems to 
have been adopted by Henry Stephens, in an edi- 
tion of Terence, printed by him, in folio, in 1529, 
and also by Erasmus q , no doubt on the ground of 

* Politian was horn in 1454, and died in 14-94. Moreri's 
Diet. art. Bassi (Ange) dit Politien. Gesneri Bibl. edit. 1545, 
art. Angelus Politianus. 

p In his Epistle to Peter Crinitus, a scholar of Politian, at the 
l)ack of the title, in the edition of 1519, he mentions the com- 
mencement of the undertaking by Politian ; that he himself had 
added from Hephaestion, Terentianus, Donatus, Rufinus, Dio- 
medes, and Priscian, some particulars relating to Comedy and 
Comic Metre, necessary to be known ; and that, from ancient 
copies, at Venice and elsewhere, he had discovered Sulpitius 
Anollinaris, a grammarian, in the time of the Emperor Ha- 
drian, to have been the author of the arguments prefixed to 
each Comedy, which had been commonly received as the pro- 
ductions of Terence* 

? In one published by him, in folio, Basil, 1532. The De- 
dication is dated Prid. Id. Decemb. 1532; and he was induced, 
as he says, to the publication, by the circumstance of having 
seen some of the Comedies played by a few of his friends. To 
this he prefixed a Dissertation « De Metris,' which he mentions 
•was the work of four days ; and since that, the variations, as to. 



what Priscian had laid down as the system ; but 
the real merit of the division is much to be doubt- 
ed, because Benedictus, in the Preface, has grossly 
mistaken two passages in Aristotle, a circumstance 
which could not fail to mislead him. He states 
Aristotle, as saying that Crates first wrote in Iam- 
bic verse i ; and also, as affirming that Iambic 
verse was at first Tetrameter s . On the contrary, 
Aristotle has really said, that Crates rejected Iam- 
bic ; and that the verse used in Tragedy, was 
changed from Tetrameter to Iambic, as Tetrame- 

the regulation of the verses, if any, have been, as it is believed, 
but trifling, and of small importance. 

r * Non est et haec praetereundum, quod primus (autore 

* Aristotele), qui personas in scenam produxerit, prologos con- 

* finxit, et per histriones fabulas repraesentaverit, ignoratur. 

* Ceterum fabulas primus confinxit Epicharmus et Phormis. 
' Nam ex Sicilia in Graeciam, ait, advectas apud Athenienses : 
' porro Crates primus Iambici specie orationes ac fabulas scripsit/ 
See Beneclictus's prefatory tract, entitled •< De Comcedia,' sig. a. 
iii. a. sub tit. ' De Membris' ' Terentius, in sua metra restitutus,* 
edit. 4to. Argentorati, 1519. 

s « lambicos et Heroicos Poetas, scribit Aristoleles, olim 
t fuisse antiquissimos, carmenque Iambicum primum Tetrame- 

* trum fuisse.' Ibid. sig. a. iiij. ' De Metro Iambico.' 

* Aristotle's words are these : c T?j $} v^o-wira. :k~3uxzv, y Trpo- 
4 'Xoy&g, v ■TrX'/iGr, vTrox.pnwv, kch o<tx toiuvtol, v,y)>Qv\~cn, to cs pvQ&t; 7roi=<i>, 
1 EKtxapjxo; kcci 4>opjuas r>p'f«y' to ju=v &v e| *P%*?S W Si/tsX/a? ixQs, tm ^e 

* AG'/)'v*k7H» Kparr,? 7rpwTo; 5p|sv, a,(pEy.zvo<; rvc ltx,fj.<otkvig idiccq, x.v,Q6\it ttoluv 
« Xoysg vi jmu'0tfff.* — ' Quis vero Larvas intulit, aut Prologos, aut nu- 

* merum Histrionum, et alia ejusmodi, in incerto est. Fabulas 
« vero Epicharmus et Phormis primi composuerunt. Hoc itaque 
« primo ex Sicilia profectum fuit. Atheniensium aulem primus 
6 sermones aut Fabulas composijit Crates, missa omnino forma 
1 lambica.'— Aristot. De Poetica, Oxon. 1760, p. 8 et 60. 


ter was first used, because Poetry was Satyric u 3 
or derived from the Satyrs, the supposed attend- 
ants of Bacchus \ This opinion of Aristotle is 
here stated, only because it contradicts the repre- 
sentation given of it by Benedictus, and in order 
to show that the system of the latter rests, as it 
most certainly does, on the misconception of two 
very important facts. Its own intrinsic autho- 
rity will be more properly considered in another 
place of this Inquiry. 

u Aristotle, De Poetica, cap. 4, speaking of Tragedy, says : 

'* Et4 ds jusysQoj 1/C //Jrtpwv uvQwv x.a,\ Asf smj yzkola,^ oia, to Ijc ctcitv^xov 
' jLtHTaCaAcTv, o\l aTicripw'^' to, te |u,sTpov Ix TETpa^eTpa ia/xbE/ov \yi- 

* veto, to' /xbv yoip KpJTOV TSTpajUETpw E^pa;vTo, dice to a-ccrvftxm xect opp^rj- 

* r'xwTEpav twv xolww? — ' Porro autem magnitudo a vilibus 

* fabulis et dictione ridicula sero fiebat illustrior, eo quod im- 
' mutatio facta fuit a Satyrica Poesi : metrum etiam ex Tetra- 
4 metro redditum erat Iambicum, primo enim utebantur Tetra- 
4 metro, nempe quod Poesis erat Satyrica et saltui aptior.' — - 
Aristot. De Poetica, 8vo. Oxon. 1760, p. 7 et 58. 

x \ Satyr-i, quia putabantur cum contis et thyrsis in Liberi 

* Patris exercitu praelia iniisse, ejus generis venabula gerebant.' 
Scaliger, Poetices Liber, lib. i, c. 17. — Natalis Comes, in his 
4 Mythologia,' edit. Genevae, 1620, p. 481, says, speaking of 
Bacchus, « Hujus Dei Satyros, et Silenos, et Lenas, et Nyrii- 

* phas, et Naiades, et Tityros sacerdotes fuisse, inquit Strabo, 
< libro decimo.'— And again, p. 479, also speaking of Bacchus, 
4 Cujus inter comites fuit Acratus genius, atque cum Panas et 
4 Satyros comites Indies expeditions habuisset, subacta India 

* atque devicta Iberia, ut ait Sesosthencs, in rebus Ibericis, 

* Pana locis praefecit, qui regionem de se Paniam vocavit, ae 

* mox juniores Hispaniam dixerunt.' 

P 2 



Present Division of the Verses in Terence not to 

he relied on, because the Manuscripts and early 

printed Editions vary from each other, and 

from the modern Editions, in the Division of 

the Verses. 

Three earliest manuscripts of Terence in prose.- — Some printed 
editions in prose also.— Manuscripts of the thirteenth, four- 
teenth, and fifteenth centuries in verse. — Collations of part 
of Terence's Andria, Act I. Sc. 2, with two manuscripts, 
and the printed editions of 1479 and 1499.— A similar col- 
lation of the Andria, Act I. Sc, 5, in three places. 

T he three earliest manuscripts of Terence, whicji 
have been consulted on the present occasion, are, 
as has been already observed, in prose, a method 
which has also been followed in some of the print- 
ed editions > ; and, although it is certainly clear 

y An edition of Terence, in folio, printed at Strasbourg, by 
John Grunninger, without a date, is in prose. This edition was 
some years since compared, by its then owner, with another 
copy of the same impression, which had the date 1496. Ano- 
ther edition, in folio, printed in the same city, and by the same 
printer, in 1499, which has a date, is likewise in prose, as is also 
another in folio, printed at Lyons, by Benedict Bourryn, in 
1527. Fabricius has observed, Bibl. Lat. vol. i. p. 34, that the 
first editions of Terence are not divided into verse. See a note 


that Terence is unquestionably verse, yet no ear^ 
lier manuscript of his works, in that state, has, 
in the course of the present undertaking', been 
found, than one of the 13th century. Two others, 
in verse, of the 14th and 15th centuries, have also 
occurred. It is not intended here, to give a re- 
gular collation, but it was yet thought advisable 
to insert some few specimens of the variations 
of the copies, by a comparison of those manu- 
scripts with the printed editions of 1479 and 1499, 
in some particular places, in order, at the same 
time, to show how much they all differ from the 
more modern editions. Many more might have 
been given, and were actually procured for that 
purpose, but it was thought that these would prove 

Andria, Act I. Sc. 2. 
Harleian Ms, 2524, of the 13th century. 

' Mirabar hoc si sic abiret : et heri semper lenitas, 
* Verebar, quorsum evaderet. Qui postquam audierat 

on Sect. XV. Dr. Leng, afterwards Bishop of Norwich (see 
Hare's Preface, p. xxiii.), the editor of the quarto edition of 
Terence, printed at Cambridge in 1701, mentions a manuscript 
in the Library of Corpus Christi college, Cambridge, as one of 
those which he had used ; and of this he says, ' Qui, tametsi 
1 versibus distinctus non sit, multa tamen vetustatis vestigia re- 
' tenit, et interpretatkmculas (e Donato, ut videtur excerptas) 
* subinde appositas habet.' p. 475, In the month of October 
3 815, two manuscripts of Terence, in the Bodleian Library # &$ 
Oxford, were inspected, and both were in prose. 

* 3 


6 Non datum iri filio uxorem suo, nunquam cuiquam 

* Nostrum verbum fecit, neque id aegre tulit. 

* At nunc faciet, neque, ut opinor, sine tuo magno malo/ 

Harleian Ms. 2525 r of the 14th century. 

4 Non dubium est, quin uxorem nolit filius : ita Davum modo 

' Timere sensi, ubi nuptias futuras audivit, 

4 Sed ipse exit foras. Mirabar hoc si sic abiret : 

4 Et heri semper lenitas, verebar, quorsum evaderet, 

4 Qui postquam audierat non datum iri filio uxorem 

' Suo, nunquam cuiquam nostrum verbum fecit ? 

4 Neque id aegre tulit. At nunc faciet, 

* Neque, ut opinor, sine tuo magno malo.* 

Edit. 1479. 

& Non dubium est, quin uxorem nolit filius i ita Davum 

'Modo timere sensi, ubi nuptias futuras esse 

'Audivit. Sed ipse exit foras. Mirabar hoc si sic abiret :: 

4 Et heri semper lenitas, Verebar, quorsum evaderet. 

4 Qui postquam audierat non datum iri filio uxorem suo, 

4 Nunquam cuiquam nostrum verbum fecit, neque id aegre tulit 

' At nunc faciet, neque, ut opinor, sine tuo magno malo/ 

Edit. 1499. 

4 Non dubium est, quin uxorem nolit filius :* 
4 Ita Davum modo timere sensi, ubi nuptias 

* Futuras esse audivit. Sed ipse exit foras. 

* Mirabar hoc si sic abiret : et heri semper 

' Lenitas, verebar, quorsum evaderet. Qui postquam 
' Audierat non datum iri filio uxorem suo, 

* Nunquam cuiquam nostrum verbum fecit, 
4 Neque id aegre tulit. At nunc faciet, 

s Neque, ut opinor, sine tuo magno malo,! 


Andria, Act I. Sc. 5. 
Harleian Ms. 2524, 13th century. 

* Hoccine est humanum factum aut inceptum ? hoccine est 

* Officium patris ? quid illud est ? proh deum fidem atque ho- 

* minum, 
1 Quid est ? si haec non contumelia est. Uxorem decreverat 
' Dare sese mihi hodie : nonne oportuit praescisse me ante I 

1 nonne priusquam 
1 Communicatum oportet ? Miseram me, quod verbum audio ?' 

Edit. 1479. 

* Hoccine est humanum factum aut inceptum ? hoccine est 

* Officium patris ? quid illud est ? proh deum fidem 

* Atque hominum, quid est ? si haec contumelia non est. Ux- 

( orem 

* Decrevit sese mihi hodie s non ne oportuit 

* Praescisse me ante ? nonne prills communicatum oportuit ? 
i Miseram me, quod verbum audio? quid Chremes?' 

Edit. 1499. 

* Hoccine est humanum factum aut inceptum ? 

* Hoccine est officium patris ? quid illud 

s Est ? proh Deum fidem atque hominum, 
s Quid est ? si haec contumelia non est. 

* Uxorem decrevit sese mihi hodie : nonne oportuit 

* Praescisse me ante ? nonne prius communicatum 
« Oportuit ? Miserum me, quod verbum audio ?' 

The same Scene. 
Harleian Ms. 2524, 13th century. 

' Itane obstinate operam dat, ut me a Glycerio miserum 
* Abstrahat ? quod si fit, pereo funditus. Adeon' hominem 
' Esse invenustum, aut infelicem quemquamne ut ego sum ? 

P 4 


Edit. 1479. 

* Itane obstinate operam dat, ut me a Gtycerio miserum 
4 Abstrahat? proh Deum atque hominum fidem, 

* Quod si fit, pereo funditus. 

1 Adeon' hominem esse invenustum, atque infelieem quenquam. 8 

Edit. 1499. 

k Irnmutatum videt. Itane obstinate operam dat, ut me 

* A Glyceric miserum abstrahat? proh Deum atque hominum 
€ Fidem, quod si fit, pereo funditus. Adeon' hominem esse 

Invenustum, atque infelieem quenquam ut ego sum.' 


Andria., Act I. Sc. 5, same Scene.. 
Harleian Ms. 2524, 13tli century. 

€ Sed cur tu abis ab ilia ? Obstetricem accerso. 
* Propera. Atque audin ? verbum umim cave 
c De nuptiis, ne ad morbum hoc etiam. Teneo.* 

Edit. 1479. 

4 Sed cur tu abis ab ilia ? Obstetricem accerso. 

' Propera. Atque audin ? verbum unum cave de nuptiis, 

* Ne ad morbum hoc etiam. Teneo.' 

Edit. 1499". 

* Sed cur fu abis ab ilia i Obstetricem accerso. 

* Propera. Atque audin ? verbum unum cave de ntfptiisy 

* Ne ad morbum hoc etiam. Teneo z .' 

z The Harleian manuscript, Ko. 5443, which is of the ele- 
venth century, and in prose', reads this passage thus : ' Ne ad 
* morbum hoc siet etiam* Teneo." The division of vesses i& 


different in different editions of Plautus and Terence; as a 
proof of which, Merula's edition of Plautus, in 4to. of the year? 
1495, and the small one by Sambucus, 1566, may be consulted 
and compared, particularly in the Pseudolus. The circum- 
stance was, no doubt, occasioned by the editors of each fol- 
lowing different manuscripts, which did not correspond with 
each other in that particular, 




Variety of Verse neither necessary nor proper in 


Quintilian's opinion that Terence should have used Trimeters 
only. — Bentley's objections to this opinion. — Remarks on 
Bentley's objections. — Verse not necessary to express the 
passions.— -The Tragedies of George Barnwell and The 
Gamester, both in prose. —Shakespear, Ben Jonson, Mil- 
ton, used only one kind of verse. — Bentley ignorant of 
Music. — Tibiae, their nature explained. — Comedy not a mu- 
sical performance throughout. — Bentley has confounded to- 
gether Time and Tune, and Length of Verse and Constituent 
Feet. — Victorinus's opinion as toMenander's change of verse, 
examined.— Quintilian's opinion seems to imply variety of 
length, at present — But the copies corrupt before his time, 
— Varro speaks of them as corrupt a century before.— 
Quintilian, Terence, Plautus, Varro, when they lived. 

Quintilian, speaking of Comedy, has said, € In 
€ Comcedia maxime claudicamus— licet Terentii 
€ scripta ad Scipioriem Africanum referantur, quse 
€ - tamen in hoc genere sunt elegantissima, et plus 
€ adhuc habitura gratiae, si intra Versus Trimetros 
€ stetissent a .' This, Bentley has endeavoured to 
ridicule, in the following words : c Mirificum sane 
e magni Rhetoris judicium ! Optabat scilicet ut 

a Quintilian, Instit. Orator, lib. x, c. 1. 


c Fabulae Terentianae, quae, is primo eujusque 
' Actu et Scaena, a Trimetris inchoantur, eodem 
c Metro ac tenore, per onines Actus Seaenasque ? 
' decucurrissent. Crederes profecto hominem 
' nunquam scaenam vidisse, nunquam Comoedum 
c partes suas agentem spectavisse. Quid voluit ? 
c quod nee Menander nee ullus Graecorum fecit, Te- 
6 rentius ut faceret I ut Ira, Metus, Exultatio, Dolor, 
* Gaudium, et quietae res, et turbatae, eodem Metro 
6 lente agerentur ? ut Tibicen paribus tonis, per- 
6 petuoque cantico, spectantium aures vel delassa- 
c ret, vel ofFenderet ? Tantum abest, ut eo pacta 
6 plus gratiae habitura esset fabula, ut, quan- 
*tumvis bene morata, quantum vis belle scripta, 
^gratiam prorsus omnem perdidisset. Id priuii 
c Artis repertores pulchre videbant, delectabant, 
6 ergo, varietate ipsa, diversaque v$% xal 7rd9n di- 
6 verso carmine repraesentabant. Marius Victori- 
' nus, p, 2500, u Nam et Menander in Comcediis 
"frequenter, a continuatis lambicis versibus, ad 
u Trochaicos transit, et rursum ad lambicos re- 
" dit." Non ita tamen agebant veteres, ut ab uno 
c in aliud plane contrarium repente exilirent, al> 
fe lambicis in Dactylicos ; sed in propinquos Tro- 
c chaicos, ipso transitu paene fallente. Quod ut 
c clarius conspiciatur, omnem Terentianam copiam 
s hie sistam, unoque et eodem pede Ditrochaeo uni- 
*• versam fere emetiar V 

b See Berkley's Dissertation < De Metris Comicis/ prefixed 
to his Terence, p. iv. 


Every friend to Bentley's memory lias abun^ 
tlant reason to wish, for the sake of his reputation 
that he had never written the above passage ; for 
one more pregnant with error, as to matters of 
fact, or more strongly indicating a want of judg- 
ment, of discrimination, and of clear and accu- 
rate perception, it would be extremely difficult to 
iind. When he ridicules Quintilian, and says he 
could never have seen a play, or an actor perform- 
ing his part, Bentley was not aware that the cen- 
sure might, with much greater truth, be retorted 
©n himself. He evidently forgot, at the time, 
what is so plain, that no man can be supposed ig- 
norant of it, that, so far from variety of verse 
being necessary for the expression of different Pas- 
sions, alt the productions of Shakespear are not 
only in one kind of Metre throughout the same 
play, but that all his plays are in the same species 
of verse with each other. Whether the object of 
the Drama be to represent the fatal effects of Jea- 
lousy, as in Othello ; of Ambition, as in Macbeth ; 
or to paint the calamitous consequences of Ran- 
cour and Malice between rival families, as in Ro- 
meo and Juliet ; he still employs the very same 
sort of verse, without any variation of length or 
constituent feet, and without any detriment to the 
Passions he exhibits. Verse, though certainly an 
elegance, has no more concern, than the rules of 
grammar have, with the Passions, or, indeed, with 
the nature of the subject treated of, whatever thai 


may happen to be, further than that, in grave 
and heroic subjects 5 Lyric measures, because they 
are light, would be improper ; and, in light and 
cheerful compositions, like Songs, the gravity of 
Heroic metre c would be equally reprehensible, 
Bentley might have recollected that the Tragedy 
of George Barnwell, written in his time, and by 
no means deficient in interest, is in prose ; and 
one of the most affecting Tragedies in our lan- 
guage, the Gamester, by Moore, is also in prose, 
though this latter was, indeed, not written till 
after Bentley' s death. Nor could the poignancy 
of the distress in any case have been heightened, 
had it been in verse, because that arises, as it 
must ever do in Dramatic Representations, from the 
scenes and events exhibited to view. All the Co- 
medies and Tragedies in our language, that are not 
prose, are in one kind of Metre throughout. Did 
any one ever object to Ben Jonson's Volpone, or 
Alchemist, to Shakespear's Tempest, Merchant of 
Venice, or Measure for Measure, or to Miltons 
Comus, that there was no change of measure in 
the speeches ? And would not such an objection, if 
ever made, be deservedly ridiculed ? Or, could the 
elegance of Comus be greater, or the interest of 

c Longinus, as cited by Webb on Poetry and Music, p. 76, 
in a note, says, * MaXXoy h 7rp-E<n to MsTpov ru iromTiKw ntoc^icn 
* 7TXs<ro»? ;£pw/j.Evw — $i m ct^ona. xa.Ta.<Tx.zva,^iTc<.u In Frag. But 
Quintilian, lib. ix. c. 4, says, « Versificandi genus est unam 
( legem omnibus sermonibus dari.' Webb, Ibid. p. 57, in a note, 


Macbeth, Othello, Hamlet, or Lear, be increased, 
had Milton in one case, and Shakespear in the 
rest, introduced into them all the varieties of Lyric 
measure that had ever been invented ? 

Bentley evidently knew nothing of Music, a 
defect common to almost, if not quite, all the 
grammarians ; and, for want of that kind of in- 
formation, which is indispensably necessary to the 
understanding correctly the subject, he has, like 
the rest, fallen into gross errors : not to mention, 
besides, the instances of his negligence and inac- 
curacy, where he had not the excuse of ignorance 
to plead ; but which, nevertheless, occur in great 
abundance in the above-mentioned passage, short 
as it is. He talks of the Tibieen, as wearying the 
cars of the audience, ' paribus tonis, perpetuoque 
* cantico ;' but, if the former expression be not bor- 
rowed from the mention of the 6 Tibke pares 9 in the 
titles of the Andria and the Hecyra of Terence, 
the whole passage is nothing more than an erro- 
neous conjecture by Bentley, and void of all 
ground ; or, if that expression has been so bor- 
rowed, it is founded on a misconception of the 
term; for, had he attended to the original passages 
in the titles to Terence's plays, he would have seen 
that the term ' pares,' is uniformly applied to the 
Instruments, to denote their correspondence with 
each other, and not to the Music. Bentley seems 
plainly to have meant, by ' Toni pares/ which 
he has used, but which does not occur in the ori- 
ginal passages, a repetition of the same notes in 
succession, a sense which is repugnant to Reason : 


for the length of the verse, it is evident, could 
never regulate what the notes should be in sound. 
The length of the verse is Measure or Time ; the 
sound of the note is Tune ; and he has, therefore, 
manifestly confounded Time and Tune together. 
The tune of a composition is determined by the 
subject and the choice of the composer, not by the 
length of the lines ; nor could there be, in the 
case of equality of measure, any greater cause for 
the recurrence of the same note, than in one where 
the metre varied. 

That he was not sufficiently informed, as to 
the history of his subject, is clear; because he 
considers the performance of the Tibicen, appa- 
rently, when he uses the term ' perpetuo cantico/ 
las a perpetual accompaniment throughout, which, 
on the evidence of the best authorities, it has al- 
ready been shown in Section XIII. of this Inquiry, 
not to have been ; and his accuracy and sagacity- 
do not merit commendation, when he cites the 
passage from Victorinus, as an answer to Quinti- 
lian d . For Quintilian has objected that Terence's 

d Victorinus, in a section or chapter, entitled ' De Poetica," 
edit. Putsch, col. 2500, says, ' Poematum autem, seu carminum, 

* species sunt tres, alia nam Graecis, kcltk rix°?> aaa 0vr*if*«Ttx»» 

* alia [jliktcc dicuntur, quae etiam a.pvrat£o\ot, et jxit&GoXikcc.' Each 
of these sorts he then proceeds to explain ; and as to the last, 
METa£oXi>ta, he uses these words : ' Mexa^oXma, autem, quae ab 
' aliis metris ad alia genera transitum faciunt, qualia esse Tra- 
' gica et Comica paulo ante memoravi. Nam et Menander, 
-' in Comcediis, frequenter a continuatis Iambicis versibus, ad 
t TTrochaicps transit, et rursum ad Iambicos redit/ 



verses were not all of the same length, namely? 
Trimeters ; and the passage from Vietorinus only 
describes those he mentions, as being some Iam- 
bic and some Trochaic, which it is manifest they 
might still have been, had they been all of the 
same equal length. Bentley has here confounded 
together two different considerations, Length and 
Constituent Feet, or Quantity and Quality, and his 
conclusions cannot, therefore, be supported. 

If Vietorinus is correct as to the fact, in his 
assertion respecting Menander, of which he has 
not produced one single instance, more of Me- 
nander s works must have been, in his time, exist- 
ing, than are now known. Among the fragments 
of his Comedies, collected as they have been, 
from Stobseus and Athenaeus, by Le Clerc, no one 
instance of such a transition, as Vietorinus de- 
scribes, has as yet been found, though they have 
been consulted for that very purpose; nor has 
Bentley himself produced or referred to any one 
example, but contented himself simply with rest- 
ing on the authority of Vietorinus, though his tes- 
timony, as has been before observed, does not 
.support Bentley in hi« objection to Quintilian. 

But, supposing the fact to be, as Vietorinus has 
stated, that Menander did interpijx Trochaic and 
Iambic verses together, still it proves nothing in 
favour of variety of verse, either as to Constituent 
Feet or Length. He has nqt said they were of dif- 
ferent lengths. If they were of equal' lengths, 
Menander has done no more than his predecessor 


Archilochus e , and the two might very reasonably 
be intermixed^ because they are both founded on 
the same proportion, and were, in fact, originally, 
not different sorts, but the same kind f . 

Quintilian s observation seems, it is true, to 
imply that he thought the verses of Terence of 
different lengths, but it is not easy to determine 
to what extent it is to be understood. Whether 
he conceived this variety of verse to have existed 
in the same scene, or whether each scene was 
throughout in the same kind of verse with which 
it began, but some of the scenes wholly Trimeters, 
others Tetrameters, is not from any thing he has 
said to be discovered. The point is, however, of 
little consequence ; for Quintilian flourished about 
A. D. 92*, Terence lived 164 years before our Sa- 
viour 11 , and Plautus, 189 5 ; so that Quintilian and 
Terence were at least 223 years asunder, and 
Quintilian and Plautus, 248 ; a period about as 
great as that from Chaucer to Spenser in the his- 
tory of the Poets of our own country. In the time 
of Quintilian there is no doubt the copies of both 
Terence and Plautus were in a deplorable state of 
inaccuracy, and more especially as to the regulation 
of the verses, because that was a subject of greater 
difficulty; for Varro k , who lived about 50 or 60 

e See Sect. V. f See Sect. V. and VII. 

« Saxius, vol. i. p. 269. h Saxius, vol. i. p. 127. 

1 Saxius, vol. i. p. 122. 

* Varro was born 1 ] 6, and died 28 years before our Sa- 
viour's birth. See Moreri's Diet, and the authorities he men- 



years before our Saviour, and nearly a century be-, 
fore Quintilian, speaks of the manuscripts as very 
incorrect^ even in his time 1 , though that was evi- 
dently but little more than a century after Plautus 
and Terence. 

tions. Varro was born in the first year of the 166th Olympiad, 
and died at the age of near 90 in the first year of the 1 88th. 
Konigii Bibl. p. 831. Varro is placed, by Saxius, vol. i. p. 
164, between 61 and 57 years before our Saviour. 

1 Camerarius, in the • Epistola Nuncupatoria,' prefixed to 
his edition of Plautus, 8vo. Basil, 1558, p. 17, speaking of the 
inaccuracy of the copies, says, * Quid vero hoc mirum ? cum 
r Varro, qui et vixit iis temporibus, quibus eruditio litterarum et 
( doctrina floruit, et proxime abfuit ab setate Plauti, alicubi de 
4 analogia querens, quod non probaret quaedam de Truculento, 
4 in iis librarii mendum accuset? posteriores autem, saepe de fide 

* exemplorum quest! et vetustiss. quorumque testimonies contra 

* vulgatas lectiones usi fuerunt, nam ilia semper corrupit impe- 

* ritia quorundam, ut ait Prisciaaus, mutantium scripturasJ 



Chorus in the Greek Tragedies and Comedies, its 
Nature; and of what Kind of Verse their 
Speeches consisted. 

Greek Chorusses do not contain variety of Metre. — Aristotle 
confines the performance of the Chorus to the interval be- 
tween the acts. — Reason to think no part of these interme- 
diate performances now existing. — The term Chorus does 
not necessarily imply Singers, or Dancers, or Musical Per- 
formances, but only a multitude of persons. — Chorus, as 
employed in the Greek Tragedies, different from that used 
between the acts. — The nature of the former correctly de* 
fined.— Aristotle says Tragic verse was originally Tetrameter. 
— Reason to conclude that to have been Bacchiac. — Cho- 
russes in the Greek Tragedies capable of arrangement as 
Bacchiac verse. — Instances and specimens of this. — Those 
Tragic verses already supposed Iambic Trimeter, are pro- 
bably Bacchiac Tetrameter. — No objection to this, except- 
ing only in verses consisting wholly of the Iambus. — That, 
however, easily removable. — Chorusses in the Greek Come- 
dies equally divisible as Bacchiac Tetrameter verse- — Spe- 
cimens from Aristophanes. — Scarcely possible to conclude 
that the Metre employed in the Greek Tragedies and Come- 
dies was any other than Bacchiac Tetrameter. 

Although, in an inquiry like the present, relating 
in so great a degree to Comic Metre, a discussion 
as to the nature of that employed in Tragedy may 
Hot at first appear necessary, yet the ascertainment 

Q 2 


of the question will here be found requisite, in 
order that no refuge or defence may be afforded to 
any one who might pertinaciously endeavour to 
support the former erroneous system of versifica- 
tion, or resist, unreasonably, that which is here 
proposed in its stead. 

After what has been so confidently asserted, 
and so hastily adopted, as the fact, respecting the 
Chorusses in the Greek Tragedies, and the varieties 
of Metre of which they are supposed to consist, it 
will surely be matter of no small surprise to their 
most zealous admirers, to be told, as is, however^ 
the case, that this imagined variety has, in truth 5 
no real existence, but is, on the contrary, only 
ideal ; and yet, to this conclusion the following 
decisive circumstances so strongly lead, that they 
seem almost, if not entirely, to forbid any other 
opinion on the subject. 

Aristotle m , in defining the different parts of a 
Tragedy, has ascertained that the performances 
of the Chorus of Singers or Dancers were no where 
introduced, but between the acts ; and although, 
in the printed editions and manuscripts of the 
writings of the Greek tragic authors, it is found, 
that some parts are assigned to the Chorus, yet 
there is very strong reason for thinking that no 
part of those intermediate performances, exhibited 
by the Chorus between the acts, is, even so much as 

m Aristotle, De Poetica, p. 18 & 72. See the passage given 
in a note on Section XIIL 


in words, not to say any thing of the Music, at this 
time existing. To understand this the more fully, 
it is proper to remark, that the appellation Chorus 
does not necessarily imply either Singers or Dan- 
cers, or Musical Performers ; for it simply 
means a multitude of persons flocking together. 
Schrevelius, in his Lexicon, art. Xopog, explains 
Xopog, as meaning ' Chorus, coetus canentium et 
( saltantium,' but could find no better an etymo- 
logy, than by expressing a doubt whether it might 
not be deductible from Xoupoo, which it is well known 
is used in the sense of 'gaudeo, laetor.' Xoowv^i, 
he renders 6 aggerem duco,' and refers its original 
to ' Xag, terra aggesta.' This verb, as he himself 
states, produces, in the First Indefinite Tense of 
the Infinitive Mood, Xoaroa, which he renders 'Ag- 
( gessisse ;' in the Future Tense of the Indicative 
Mood, as he himself observes, Xooo -oo, which he, 
in like manner, translates c Aggerabo ;' and, in 
the Participle of the First Indefinite Passive, Xa>cr- 
6ug> which he explains by the Latin ' Aggestus.' 
Now, in all these words, it is evident that the pre- 
vailing idea of signification is that of accumula- 
tion, agglomeration, or collected multitude, with- 
out any reference to the circumstance of what 
kind the particulars of that multitude shall con- 
sist ; but none of them imply any such idea as 
that they were Singers or Dancers, or had any re- 
lation to Music ; and it is clear that the above is 
the genuine sense. A far more probable and ra- 
tional etymology may, however, be found, from 

9 3 


considering Xcgog as produced not from the verb, 
6 Xaipoo, gaudeo, lee tor/ with which it has no affi- 
nity; but from the substantive ' Xoog, terra aggesta, 
i humus, agger, pulvis,' and from the verb ' Vsw f 
c fluo, fundo,' and as signifying ' Concursus,' or, 
in English, a concourse of people : and, indeed, 
between the Chorus, as employed in the Greek 
Tragedies themselves, by iEschylus, Euripides* 
and Sophocles, and that which consisted of Sing- 
ers and Dancers, and amused the audience be- 
tween the acts, there seems to have been a very 
wide distinction, which it is necessary here to ob- 
serve. In the writings of the Greek Tragedians, 
the Chorus acts the part of one of the interlocu- 
tors, their speeches are intermixed in the dialogue 
with those of the principal characters, to whom 
they address themselves, and by whom they are 
answered ; and what is there said by the Chorus, 
is preceded and followed by the speeches of the 
other characters, and so connected with the rest 
of the play, that it is impossible to separate them. 
The use of the Chorus, as thus employed, was to 
represent a crowd or number of auditors or by- 
standers, such as are accustomed to surround any 
man who is telling an extraordinary tale, singing 
a ballad, or crying a dying speech of a malefactor 
in the streets ; and their speeches were evidently 
intended to resemble those observations and re- 
marks which some of the individuals in a crowd 
are often found to express on what they have 
heard. In this there cannot possibly be discovered 


any necessity, opportunity, or intention, for any 
reference to either Singers or Dancers ; nor was 
any such really designed. Misled, as they all 
have been, by wrong principles and erroneous 
prepossessions, as to the nature of theatrical re- 
presentations among the Greeks and Romans, the 
grammarians and critics of all ages and nations 
have implicitly and blindly followed the opinions 
of some author more ancient, which at first was 
but conjecture, and capable of refutation. They 
have affected to divide and distribute the speeches 
of the Chorus into the various portions of Strophe, 
Antistrophe, and Epode, and to suppose that all 
these were sung by different Musical Performers ^ 
and they conceived them to comprise as great a 
variety of verse, as their own inexperience of the 
real fact led them to think necessary to reduce 
the verses to any rule ; because they were unable 
to scan them as Iambic, and had not sufficient 
skill to suggest any other probable species, to 
which they might all be ascribed. In consequence 
of this, and to suit their own ideas, they have 
without scruple regulated the verses, as long or 
short, or as differing in their constituent feet, as 
they found occasion, not unfrequently, though 
most absurdly, dividing a word at the end of a 
line, and giving part of it to that and the re- 
mainder to the succeeding verse ; a circumstance, 
in itself sufficient to destroy their theory. To for- 
tify their system, they have so settled the ar- 
rangement of the separations into Strophe, Anti- 

Q 4 


strophe, and Epode, as to suit their own division 
of the verses, which, as being perfectly erroneous 
in itself, has no doubt produced error in this dis- 
tribution also. But it has been since found, on a 
variety of experiments, made in several places, 
that these verses are capable of an equal distribu- 
tion into lines of the same number of feet with each 
other ; and there seems, at present, strong ground 
to believe that, if any divisions at or near the 
places where these editors have marked the com- 
mencement of a Strophe, Antistrophe, or Epode, 
are apparently authorized by the context, or di- 
rected to be made, it was only intended that one 
person of the crowd should first speak, and after- 
wards another, and so on, but that only one person 
should speak at the same time ; the necessity for 
which regulation is sufficiently apparent. 

Aristotle n has also said, that the Metre em- 
ployed in Tragedy was originally Tetrameter, ak 
though he has not noticed of what species that 
Tetrameter was. For the reasons before assigned 
in this work °, which need not here be repeated, 
there is adequate cause to conceive it to have been 
Bacchiac ; and it is a certain fact, that, on experi- 
ment, those lines which constitute the speeches 
of the Chorus, and which have been erroneously 
imagined and arranged as of almost every species 
of verse that could be suggested, have been found 

n Aristotle, De Poetica, 8vo. Oxon. 1760, p. 7 & 58. The 
passage has been already given in a note op Section VI. 
s See Section VI. 


capable of a correct regulation as Bacchiac. Cer- 
tain it is, that they cannot, by any mode, be ren- 
dered Iambic Trimeters, as the rest of the verses 
in these Tragedies have very erroneously been sup- 
posed to be. Bacchiac Metre, for the reasons al- 
ready urged, is by far the more probable kind to 
have been used; and that verses of that species do 
actually occur in the writings of the Greek Tra- 
gedians, and that these Chorusses are of that very 
sort ? it is imagined no one can doubt, who suffice 
ently attends to the following examples : 

The initial lines of the Chorus, in the first act 
of Sophocles's Aiag jjLci<;iyo<popos, or Ajax Flagek 
lifer, may be thus regulated as Bacchiac Tetra- 
meter, although they have, in the printed editions, 
been differently divided, and said, as there distri-* 
buted, to be Anapsestic. 

Ts7\jM[jlwvis J 7r<xi T7]g c&jj,\'PipvTOV X^Xtzfjuyog 

9 E7ri%atpw | <re 5' otocv 7rXyj\yq Aicg i}\£o&[A5vqg 
Acyog Ik Acz\mwv 7ta\Ko8(>cvg tV/|S^ ^iya,v 
Ojlvov lyjjo | Kocl 7rs(po£y\jjLai 7TTyvyjg ] oug oiaucc 
Tiikciag J cog xoa rvjg | yvy (p6(^6Vfjg \ WKrog 
hleyciXoi $opv\£oi Kotrsyjsg \ Yipug hrl | ^v<ryJhcio& 

p Sophoclis Tragoediae, a Maittaire s 12rao. Lend. 1747 S 
yoj. i. p. 15. 


Or the above lines may be also thus arranged : 

— W v WW*. W » — _• W w «. ,, 

£#-#poy oiy^il^ov erf jucfv | aS Trpa (Tcroylr' lirrfoupfa 

2e §' oVcey TrXqly/j Aiog 7j\Q^jjisv7Jg Xo\yog sx, 
JXctvctoov 7ta\9o9govg S7n|(o'IJ piyuv ox\vov syft 

'£!$• k#x T>?£ | VW/ <p9i[ASV'/ig j ]/i>7CTa£ jic&ya|Ao/ 96pv£oi 

WW—. _ --. 'W "O m — W WW _ WW™ 

The following Chorus from the same Tragedy 
may also be distributed in the following manner ; 

Tsxpyi<r<rM \ hivoc 7Tca Ts\h£VT<%nog | Xsysicf 

_ _ W> _ U ' W \Jt '- VI — — — _ — 

*HjU,7j/ TOV I Ctf>-Sp« ha\7TS(p0l&C&O-\9o6l 7CM)C0l$ 

1^5 wo/ I jicoi T05% tag | so/ft£ jlcgsAJAov ^ 

QVK £YJ$\(T(ZT AlteVjTOg 01OCV \ TIJvSg 

Socvcrcrsi | 6op 'Iw | p?/ ^cc* »j^p | eoiK-Sv^* 

And this, from the OiSmovg Tv^vvog of the sam& 
author, may be thus given ; 

''fl Awg- a|Su£7r^ (paV/ | Tf£ ttotc joig \ 7rohv%pv<rQU 

* Sophoclis Tragcedige, a Maittaire, 12mp. Lond. 1747, 
vol. i, p. 27. 


<SJ> W at WW — WW — — W T WW V VM 

4)o£spc£v (pp'svce, | ^ei^ocTi 7vdx\hoov *Ijf/ [s JgjA/s 

„ — — w — w w — — — ww — 

Uuicw &p\(pl <ro] d(o[jLe\vog ji poi y\v£ov v\ 

WW- WW- - - W _ _ W W -, W »J? 

IT£pmAAcyx/|v#/£' ojpa/g- I 7rccKiv l^pAvicrHg %psog 
%t7rs poi w\%pvcrioig \ tskvov "EXTriftog <£u,&poT£ r , 

Or the following is another arrangement, of which 
these very same lines are equally capable ; 

_ WW WWW — WW— WW — 

V X1 Aiog a\^vS7rig <pd\ri Tig 7Tots | rug 

w _ — — — — w — ww w _ 

UoKv%pv\(rov 7rvQ£\vog dyXac&g j eQag 

— w — ww — ww— ww— ww 

®y&ag lx\riTCi^L (po£s\pav (ppeva 5c/]ju#t4 

— — W _ WW www — — — w — 

TldhXcAjv 'ij^£ XaAi'fs Haidv | c^c(£>/ era} 

— W W — W — WW — WW— w w «s 

'A^o^svcg I t/ ju,0/ $ woy | | 7repiTsX\hoiJL£VM$ 
' ' Clpaig 7ru\Xiv s%ocviS\<rsig %$og el\ir( pot 

— — W — — W — WW— WW 

*Q %pv<re\ag texvov | 'EA7t*5o£ c&^.\S^ots» 

Again, these very same lines may be also thus 
distributed : 

— WW W WW — WW m. WW— W— — — 

v fl Aiog d\$v£7rrjg (pari | rig ttote rag \ 7roKv%pvorov 
Hv6oovog j dyXaag &}£$$ 0qbag | sktetoc^o&i 

WW— WW — WW— — W— WW 

Qo&spdy <pph<% | ^sfpctTt 7rccX\toiiv 7 lfj\is 

W WW — — — W — WW— W — WW 

AdXis Uca\dv dfi(pi \ col d£ou.svogA t! ^loi % vsov 

r Sophoclis Tragoediae, a Maittaire, 12mo. Lond. 1747, 
vol. L p. 22L 


H 7rspiTcX\\op£vcii$ c<j\pczis ttccXiv | £%avv<retg 
Xpeog ewe | poi w %Qvas\cig jixvov j 'E Aw/Jos'. 

Variety of verse in the same scene has been 
already s repeatedly shown in the course of the 
present Inquiry, to be an idea repugnant to Rea- 
son; and, if some of the verses, as above men- 
tioned, are decidedly proved to be Bacchiac Te- 
trameters, why may not all the rest be also the 
very same, if they, like the others, are capable 
also, as they are, of the very same mode of scan- 
ning? And, indeed, in the only case, which at 
first may appear to oppose this conclusion of the 
facility of regulation, the difficulty which seems to 
exist, may be easily surmounted ; and Iambic Tri- 
meters may, therefore, be readily and correctly 
scanned as Bacchiac Tetrameters. It is true that 
Aristotle also asserts that the Tetrameter verse, 
which he mentions, was afterwards changed to 
Iambic * ; but, as it does not appear, because he has 
not disclosed the fact, that he knew of what kind 
those Tetrameters were, he cannot be a competent 
judge, whether any real change was in fact made. 
Every acatalectic or complete Trimeter verse, ap- 
parently of the Iambic or Trochaic species, is ca- 
pable of being scanned as Bacchiac Tetrameter, 
except where, in the former, the feet are all lam- 

s See Section XVIII. 

* Aristotle, De Poetica, 8vo. Oxon, 1760, p. 7 & 58. The 
passage itself has been already given in a note on Section VI* 



buses ; and this last only fails, because the Bac- 
chiac admits feet equal in time, either to five or 
six short syllables, but rejects those equal only to 
four. In scanning such an Iambic Trimeter, there- 
fore, two whole Iambic feet are included in one of 
the Bacchiac ; and the line is thus rendered, not 
a Tetrameter, but Trimeter. Verses, wholly con- 
sisting of the Iambus, are, however, it is believed, 
not very frequently to be met with u ; and, even 
when they occur, a very small change will remove 
the difficulty, as is evident in the two following 
lines, which are found in different places of the 
King pagiyotpopo?, or Ajax Flagellifer, of Sophocles, 
v. 12 and v. 106. 

u Dr. Leng, afterwards Bishop of Norwich, has remarked, in 
the observations, entitled * De Senariis/ prefixed to the * Varias 
i Lectiones,' at the end of his edition of Terence, that the line, 

* Amantium irae amoris integratio est/ 

is the only instance of a pure Iambic, which he had found in the 
writings of Terence. Terentii Comcediae, ISmo. Cantab. 1701, 
p. 279. But even this is not a decisive instance of a verse ail 
Iambuses, because it is well known that the second syllable in 
' integratio,' is not necessarily short, but common ; and if that 
is considered as long, the foot is not an Iambus, but a Spondee; 
besides that, in some copies ' integratio ' stands ' redintegratio.* 
The passage as it now stands (notwithstanding the awkward ex- 
cuse made for it by way of rule in the Latin Grammar, see edit. 
1795, p. 73), is in reality ungrammatical, for it contains a noun 
in the Plural, as the Nominative case to a Verb in the Singular 
Number. Probably the author originally wrote 

* Amantium ha amoris integratio est/ 

and some copyist erroneously wrote < ira?/ instead of c Ira * 


&t spyov zqw smirstv o orov %ocpt]f 
Qouui 8amv yap cIvtqv ovn ttw Hh&t* 

If the first be read, 

IlfocrsT epyoy | ££*v ev\va7rsiv o oiov j %ajp«r 
and the last, 

OocKivu j fevay yafp «u|to)/ outi 7r^ | 8ekca- 

they will both scan as Bacchiac Tetrameter*. npo<r- 
m is exactly of the same signification as En % and 
OoiKsoo and ®<»xsvw are, in fact, the same verb, as 
appears from Schrevelius's Lexicon, in the articles 
for each of those words. Most probably the pas- 
sages originally stood as here corrected, but some 
critic or transcriber, erroneously conceiving them 
Iambic, altered them as they now stand, to make 
them conformable to the rules of that species ; 
and those who are sufficiently aware of the corrupt 
state of the manuscripts and early printed editions, 
will have no difficulty in believing that such might 
have very probably been the case. 

The same, in all respects, may be said of 
the Chorus introduced in the Greek Comedy, the 
speeches of which, it is evident, from the two 
following specimens, may be completely regu- 
lated as Tetrameter Bacchiac verse, without any 
necessity for adopting that absurd practice of di- 
viding the same word into two different lines, 
which perpetually prevails in the Chorusses of 


Aristophanes, as at present regulated in the print- 
ed editions, and no doubt in the manuscripts also, 
from which those printed editions were taken. 

The first of these examples occurs in the first 
scene of the second act of Aristophanes's Plutus, 
and is regulated as a separate Strophe, and so 
entitled in Gelenius's edition of Aristophanes, fo. 
Basil, 1547, p. 18; but the correct distribution is 
evidently as follows : 

Hot ev JLop(v\Soo S7r£tcrsv ccg [ ovrag xcc\7rpu£ 
"Me^ccy^lvov j (rnoop i(rBt\stv ccvrvj | $* s[aczttsv 
Avroig jJt,i\iAiq<ro[JLMi 9rav|ra j^qitov v\^s7g Js 

rpuAX/^0v]T« U7T0 <plKY^i\ocg S7T£<r3s J jE/^Tp %o7poim 

The second is to be found in the third act of the 
Nephelai, regulated both in Gelenius's edit. p. 107* 
and in that by Scaliger, 12mo. Lugd. Bat. 1624^ 
p. 140, as a Strophe, and so termed in each ; but 
the lines ought manifestly to be disposed in the 
following manner : 

Nw ^siPs\tov too 7ri(rv\vw jag 7repi\$s^iot<rfr 

Aoyoio-i nou \ (p^ovnci %ou \ yvoo^oi^noig j u^pi^vocig 

07T7TQTSoog j y uvTOiv X(\yoov\vm' 


tfrczvqcrsTcti | vvv ya^ unocg | sv8ot$$ nfv\$vvog 

\* <_ = v< \-> _ _ \> \> _ <u _ 

9 AvsiTCit J crotyiocg iqg | tt/p/ to/£ sl/xo/f 

4?iXoig £g\h uyuov )is\yigog «A|a' a; 

XIoAAcug- TSg- | 7rpsa£v7EQbsg 'yfiscri \ %m<gelg 

liTS^Voia'Oig I f?^0V <pOo\v7}V % Tt\vi 

'Kaipsig ?c#* J r^y ct6^u|t8 Qvcrty sl\we» 

In short, it is manifest that all scenes, of whatever 
kind, which are at present supposed to consist of 
any other species of verse than Bacchiac Tetra- 
meter, are equally capable of a regular distribu- 
tion into that mode of versification, because where- 
ever the attempt has been made it has invariably 
succeeded. No candid, impartial, or intelligent 
person, who recollects and duly and attentively 
considers the connexion always imagined to exist 
between Tragedy and Comedy, and the rites of 
Bacchus'; that the hymns to Bacchus were hv 
Bacchiac verse x ; that the Chorusses, both in 
Tragedy and Comedy, may be scanned as of that 
species, but not as Iambic y , as may also the verses 
supposed to be Trimeter Iambic in Plautus and 
Terence z ; that variety of verse is not necessary or 
proper in dramatic representations % and that 

« Sect. XII. * Sect. VI. 

y See the former part of this Section. 

* See Sect. XXVIII. a Sect. XVIII, 


therefore all such verses as appear to be at the 
same time Iambic and Bacchiac, ought to be de- 
nominated Bacchiac b ; that Aristotle has admitted, 
that Tragic verse Was Tetrameter c , which, for the 
reasons already assigned, could not have been any 
other than Bacchiac 1 ; and that any change of 
that to Iambic is extremely doubtful, though 
asserted by Aristotle % because Iambic Trimeter 
verses may unquestionably be scanned as Bacchiac 
Tetrameter*', together with the circumstance of 
the gross errors and confusion in all manuscripts-, 
will, it is conceived, be able to satisfy his own 
mind, that Bacchiac Tetrameter was not the 
species, and the only species, intended to be em- 
ployed in theatrical or dramatic Representations 
among the Greeks, as well as among the Latins, 
should any such unfounded assertion be perti- 
naciously attempted. 

b See Section XXVIII. 

c Aristotle, De Poetica, 8vo. Ox on. 1*760, p. 7 & 5S. See 
the passage already inserted in a note on Section VI. 

d See Section VI. e Aristotle, De Poetica, ubi supra, 

f See Section XX. XXI. 

« See Section XXIII. XXIV. XXV. 



Species of Verse used by Greek Comic Writers. 

Specimens from Eupolis— from Cratinus — from Aristophanes — 
from Philemon — from Menander. — Bisset's enumeration of 
sorts of verse in Aristophanes's TIx«to?. — Remarks on the 
before-mentioned specimens.— Aristotle's opinion that the 
Metre of Tragedy changed from Tetrameter. — His senti- 
ments what Rhythmus should be used in speaking. — Some 
persons have erroneously supposed the Tetrameters he men- 
tions, Trochaic— Bishop Hare has interpolated the first of 
the two passages from Aristotle. — Objections to the suppo- 
sition that the Tetrameters were Trochaic. — Present etymo- 
logy of the term Trochaic objectionable. — A better etymo- 
logy proposed.— Aristotle says, Tragedy derived from the 
Dithyramb, an hymn to Bacchus. — The Tetrameter verse 
mentioned by Aristotle, therefore, more probably Bac- 
chiac.— Comedy absurdly derived, by Aristotle, from the 
Phallica. — Comedy, as relating to private individuals, pro- 
bably called (pxvhtyM. — Romans acknowledged in Comedy 
some relation to Bacchus.— An altar to him placed on the 
stage. — Reasons why Iambic verse not properly applicable 
to Comedy.— Greek Comic verse, therefore, probably not 
Iambic. — Bacchiac verse, as connected with Bacchus, had a 
kind of natural connexion with Comedy. — Strong cause, 
therefore, for conceiving Greek Comic verse Bacchiac. 

"W hat species of verse was employed by the 
Greek Comic writers, in framing their Comedies^ 
will best appear from the following specimens from 


the writings of Eupolis, Cratinus, Aristophanes, 
Philemon, and Menander. 

The first of these, from Eupolis h , occurs in 
Gesner's edition of Stobeeus, p. 32, edit. fo. Ti- 
guri, 1543, not fo. 337 (probably intended for fo. 
33, 1. 7), as erroneously referred to from the In- 
dex. It consists, in the whole, of eight lines, of 
which these are the four first 1 : 

* AAA' oc\k^st J w 9s\<xt&i I 7roKKa. | kqu %v\vts ts. 

_VJ _ W — V — — _ \J \J \J \J 

' X^^wr', I fiuSu j yap 7T^og- I ^ag" | 7rpwrc^ | aVcAcj- 

_ w _ 

\j yj v — — — o_ — \j *j \j _ _ _ w — 

<v Or/ iJLOc\9oVTSg \ rxg %£\ws£ ph \ hzyc-js | froir^Toig ac|pgc, 
. rly of T/g* T^y ej/tfao ccvtcuv [lyj ds £v %sipov <p,f?ovw. 

h Eupolis lived between 428 and 425 years before our Sa- 
viour. Saxius, Onom. first edit. p. 8. 

1 These verses may be, without any violation, regulated as 
Bacchiac, thus; 

AAX' ot.-A.btiT J u> 0Ea.',Ta; sr&XAa J xai 

Suv/We J ;>/py/^aT tvQv j <yap Trpoc ?t|£a<x$ 

TT^wToy oi,'no\ J or* j jxa9ovTS£ j Ttfj 5*v£S 

Mey Xe^ete | TrotrjTa? J croty&c vv \ $e nc tm 

k This line is most evidently incorrect, both as to sense and 
metre : it should be, 

hy ds T*$ T(uv syoad cciiruv jxxos p££fpov sw^povwy. 

From E/£$gw, ovoc, Mentis compos, prudens, sapiens. See Schre- 
vein Lexicon, art. E/*$f«v. As it stands in the text, it will not 

R 2 


The second, from Eupolis also, will be found 
in the same work, fo. 246, and is as follows : this 
also comprises eight lines, of which these are the 
four first : 

4 c HfLs7g | yap &% | Stw | Tsoog \ oqtlo\)\^sv oo j yipov\teg 9 
' 'AAA' ^jcrew ^ c |/x7y t)J J 7roA. c / | TrpwTQv I juiv o/ j g%ot,tvi\- 

scan, without a Poetical Licence, which, when it is properly cor- 
rected, is wholly needless, as will be plainly seen in the follow- 
ing, which is the correct line ; 

"Hv $e j t»£ twv | hQcccf J ctvivv J y.ri$i J p£E?poy | EjjtJppo\ywv 

and it exhibits a striking proof of what has been said in a former 
Section (VIII.), as to the possibility of removing a Poetical 
Licence, by a proper correction of the text. No dependence 
can be placed on manuscripts, or ancient copies of any kind, 
as to the regulation and division of verses, or on the understand- 
ing or information possessed by those persons, by whom any 
such distribution was made. The insuperable objections to both, 
will be seen stated in Sections XVI. and XVII* 

m In like manner these verses also, by a new regulation, 
may, with equal facility, and without any other change, be 
rendered Bacchiac, thus; 

Keel pm \\yu ttoWuv J 7rapoyT&>y, j ax 'iyja 


And the third, from the same author, Eupolis, is 
given in the above edition of Stobeeus, p. 21 6 5 
though erroneously described in the Index, as ex- 
isting at p. 17. It consists only of the two fol- 
lowing lines : 

* Kai t« | [jlsv ti\vk\c*) | ys 7T<xv\cro^c&i I Xoyx 

' <&pdo-00 | $£ TCc\7Tpo7\KCi hoc | 700V %bt)\(HWV "t 

Opwv crap nj/-uy. w/*«$ | yap y^ «|tw tewj 
5 f2>ty//,Ey j w "yspoviTEfj aXX r]|cray »)'juuy 

_ VJ _ _ — u _ w _ «, 

Tij TroXs* j Tfuroi juJy j o< rpaTT^yoi. 

n Gesner, in the above edition of S.tobapus, published by 
him, has given a translation of this first line, thus : 

* Relinquara ambages dicendo ;* 

but says, as to the second, ' Hie versus in Graeco obscurus est;' 
and he, therefore, does not of that attempt any version. The 
passage, on due consideration, will be found very intelligible ; 
and it would not have been thought necessary here to explain 
it, if he had not himself raised the difficulty, and to prevent a 
misconception that the line might be corrupt. Schrevejius, in 
his Lexicon, art. Tlpo/f, xoj, renders it * donum, dos, gratia, 

* ace. Tpoixa ;' and says that it is adverbially used for * gratis, 

* sine mercede,' because it is derived from ?rpo and »*«, yenio, as 
l>eing a gift, ' quo quis alium prsevenit ultro :' or, he says, it 
may come from TrpoEcn?, largitio, and be deduced from irpoH/xeM, 

* effundo largiter.' The same author, in his Lexicon, art. A*x, 
admits that the preposition Aj«, in composition, signifies, among 
other senses, l more' ['in the manner of']. Scapula, in his 
Lexicon, art. Xwpsw, says it means ' Eo, accedo, proficiscor, 

* profero me.' Now, rendering ra ?rpoi>ca, by the words < qua? 
' sponte veniuitf/ or ' qua? ultro veniunt/ a sense perfectly 

* 3 


The following specimen from Cratinus ° has been 
furnished from Casaubon s edition of Athenseus, 
p. 29. It is there erroneously printed as prose, but 
ought manifestly to be divided into verse in the fol- 
lowing manner : 

e Nuy owv \ 'toot J M;yto joy jJISftW <zp\r(oog 
c Olvlct\kov S7Tc\tou }ux\ko7\%\& i I , -hjdu | KsysL. 

consistent with that above attributed to irpo*f ; A*a, by the word 

* more* or * modo," a meaning which it certainly bears in com- 
position, and may reasonably have, when separate ; and ' h« 

* t«wv xf u f im » ty the words ' more, quo occurrunt,' which is per- 
fectly agreeable to the signification of Xwp?«, as stated above, 
the line is free from all difficulty, and ought, therefore, to be 
rendered thus : 

Dicam autem quae sponte veniunt, more quo occurrent. 

These two lines, like the rest of the Iambic Trimeters aeata- 
Jectic, may be also scanned as Bacchiac, thus : 

K.a/ ry ^otsv | y>vx.\oj j yi irccvaofMca | XoyH 
<J>pctc7w d= rex. I Trpotxa dija. rwv p£&|p/&jv« 

° Cratinus lived between 428 and 425 years before our Sa° 
viour. Saxii Onom first edit. p. 8. 

p These, although apparently Iambic Trimeter acatalectie 
verses, may yet be scanned as Bacchiac Tetrameter, thus : 

Nyy o txv '/do* J Msvdcuoii J yjbwyr ocg\riit}$ 
Owictkov | £7Tetcu xaixoAaQE?, j >caJ Xa'yEi 


But, in Plutarch's Life of Pericles, the three fol- 
lowing lines from Cratinus are inserted. In the 
Greek edition, in folio, Basil, 1533, fo. 110, they 
are given as prose, but ought evidently to be thus 
arranged q : 

' XTczvig j Ss noci \ 7rpsorSvys\v^g Xpovog r \ dftKyj\koi(Ti 
* Vliysys\tc [Asyjcrfrov titL\t£tov j tvpocvpov 
( "Clv SjJ I KE(pocK'/]ysvps\Tcc]/ Qs\oi Kcz\i\ov<n s . 

As a specimen of Aristophanes's * versification, 
the following six verses, which are the first of the 
first scene of his Comedy of UAxrog, are here given. 
The whole scene consists of 54 lines, but these 
are sufficient. 

* fig dp\yoc7\iov | nzpoLy^t! £cr|r/v, 5 | Zsu. kcci | 6sgi 9 
i A&Aov | ysvso-\Bcci 7roc^a, | (ppovxv\ra,g Sc<r|7roT&, 

^ So also these, the two first of which appear Iambic Tri- 
meter acatalectic and catalectic, and the last a Trochaic Trime- 
ter acatalectic, may be, in like manner, scanned as Bacchiac : 

Xtcwjs oe KOil J it^ia-Qvyivriq j Xpoyo? a,XXr,\Xoicri 
MiyEvsTH (jJ\yirov t/xjtetov rupavjvov 
Ov %-n Kt<pa,\\nyzvfi\Ta,it Qeo/ J xaXew*. 

r In the printed edition this word is given as Xfovuc, which 
is plainly corrupt. 

8 Plutarchi Vitas, Gr. fo. Basil, 15353, p. 110. 

1 Aristophanes lived between 4*22 and 413 years before 
Christ, Saxii Onom. first edit. p. 8. 

B 4 


f Hv yelp j tci (3'c\\ti<tS" o 6s\pec7reav | Ksfag \ ri%^ 

— «-» - __!-»_ 

6 Msfs'XjEiy j b6vd<y\ycv} rov | fep^7roy|ra row j koctcwv, 
* TS q;a>\i*KT0S \ yelp iit \ ea, j rov uv\piov "•' 

Athensens, lib. yii. edit. Casanbon, p. 288, 
has given from Philemon x the following passage, 
which has from him been copied by Le Clerc, into 
his edition of the Fragments of Menander and 
Philemon, p. 330. In all, this passage consists of 
26 lines ; and of these, the following are the six 
first : 

«.» .. *> 

4 fig i\[ASpog | [a V7ryX\Qs yn | ts k ov\^ezvcp- 
6 hi%ai | ^oKov\ti t ov\$ov ocg \ imtfh\cwc6v 

u The above verses, which also appear to be Iambic Trimeter 
acatalectic, may, like those before given, be equally scanned as 
Eacchiac thus ; 

Hy yoof ret J (3iXTi<r& I Gelpa^av Asf |a; Tup^ 

METs'^jtv oi|vay>c>5 Toy j 0Epe£?rqvTOS j rwy xctxtiv 
TS cTWjW,a|Toj yap «>c J la rev j y.vfiov* 

x Philemon lived 320 years before Christ. Saxii Onom. firs! 
edit. p. 9. Edit. 1775, vol. i. p. 86, 


e Nj} tvJv j AQvjIvgcv, fj\$v y egr \ £vyj\jj.sps7v 9 
6 Ev U7rcc\cnv !%\9vg otira\hog ol\og ysyo\vs poi, 
* O7ov | 7rocpoc7s\9siyJ ov | 7rs(p(x,p\y.o<,K?j\^svov, 

U — v/ _ v-/ _. w _ _ _ uw 

The following passage from Pliilemon occurs 
in Athenaeus, lib. xiii. p. 589, and has been thence 
inserted into the Fragments of Menander and Phi- 
lemon, by Le Clerc, p. 296. The whole consists 
©f 16 lines ; but the following, which are the first 
six, are sufficient for the present purpose: 

* 2u 8' slg I U7rocv\rocg sv\psg ocv\9poo7rcvg | SoAwy. 

' Xs yocp | Xsyou\o'iv tovt j $s7y j 7rpooTOV | fioorwv*, 

y The above verses, which, like some of the former ones, ap- 
pear to be Iambic Trimeter acatalectie, will, like them, be found 
equally capable of being scanned as Bacchiac, thus : 

f>i */x.e|p^ [a V7?ri\Qt J yri te y.' ov[pav£ 
Affat (jtb\x.6vrt t oy|\^ov w<; eV|>cEvWaw 
Hr, 7*jv AjOwav, r'jdJ <y' 'i'j-t' suj»iju,=pErv, 
Ev ttJKa,<riv | <;£9y£ 06770.1X0; 0/0; J yiyovi [j.oi f 
Oiov ?:ot,;Gt\jtQBuC ov J 77£$apjU.ay.£ujjtxEvot'. 

2 This word, though necessary to complete the verse, is omit- 
ted in Athenseus, but supplied by Le Clerc. 

» IS VJ 


' A7]JJL0Ti\kQV 00 j ZSV TTpCty^tX, TtOCl I <TOUTV)\piOV* 

* M^'V | 00Uv\t06 77}V j 7T0A/V | VSto\TSp00V, 

* Tjm*£ | t' £%ov|t#£ tjjv I ccvdy\Ka>l(Zv j (pucnv a .' 

Among the Fragments of Menander and Phi- 
lemon, published by Le Clerc, p. 344, is the fol- 
lowing passage from Philemon. It was not thought 
necessary to give the whole, consisting, as it does, 
of 15 lines, and the first eight, therefore, are 
only here given : 

e ^£l K.Ks\ov y 7rav\(rosi (pKv\ccpuy, ] ccv h cx\vYig to | .ftMV&dtysfy, 

6 Ay£7Tl\}t0VpYl\T0V (Ti\o£>UJQV j 70V j3l[w X?j\tV) 7T0i\d0)/, 

8 Like several of the former, these Iambic Trimeter aca- 
talectic verses may be also scanned as Bacchiac, thus : 

"Zv y £ij ccttccvItus £upE£ ay|@p«7rot/j Zo|Xwv. 
Se yap xi<yov\<xtif tout ijoEiv Trpwroy J jSporw, 
A'/?/AOTi/t-;y | w Zsv 7Tpay!ju,a. xa/ cwl'njfioy 
Ka* y.oi \s\yuv t«t i<r\ny ap/^oo-oy J ZoA^y 
Mi?nv olp^vTO. Twy ] sroPuy y.EWJTEpwy, 
Taryj t' EJ^oyraf tvv J ay«.y>ta/Jav (fucriy. 

b Homer, Iliad B. v. 488, and Iliad A. v. 232, makes ay 
short. This must therefore be an Iambus instead of a Trochee. 


4 Ovts | yap vav\ayog, \ av pj | yv\g Xd\(^r t roa \ (pspoy.z\vog 9 

* Ou 7T0T | ay crw|(Tc/^ J a-VTOv, | cur' aJ[^p 77£\vvig ys\yu>g t 
s Mvj ov Te%\vyjv [jLct\9cuv s $v\vdiT av \ d<r(poc\Koog £jjj/ | tov 

< @lov. 

* AAAa | yo'/i^ocT \ sgtv | ^ij/' [ ^ y£ t4\%*0~£ d\noXkv\Tau 

* K-Ti^iMOiT, j oiki\o,i' Tii^ Si | /x5t^So|A«V cutc | dyvo\s7g 

* "On 70V ] 8V7To\pOV 7l\9yj(TI | 7r7O%0y j s!f T/JV j ai)pi\oV, 

Gesner, in his edition of Stobseus, p. 208, whence 
these lines are taken, has printed them as prose, 
though, in a marginal note, he says they are Tro- 
chaic verse. At the apparent end of some of the 
lines at least, there seems a greater space than 
between the other words ; but this is evidently 
only the regulation, if it deserves to be so called, 
of the editor, and cannot be relied on, as in the 
original manuscript it was probably written as 
prose. These lines may be regulated as Bacciiiac^ 
and will then stand divided thus : 

*fl KAcoy, | Travvai (pXv\apow, av | 0Kir/jg 

To [JLCtvOocVSlV j OiV£7T IKXwViTOy (TS\OCV70V 

Tov (olov I >J\(ry\ 7roi\oov sis | yap 

mp •— <J — — — W__ W K/ \J K) 

Navayog, [ av [J,yj yrjg \ Xaj3v}T<xi j (psgofj^vog, 

— W _ __<J _v/_ w _ 

Ov 7T0T dv | (TCaXTHcV | abJOV, OVT | dlTJp 

** — y — _ _ _ k> _ w„ 

H/w yfywg" I /^ cu T£%VYjV I {jLaQtvv, SuvcziT j 



— *> — — — WW — W m, W „ <u> 

f A<r(p&X£g | £y\v tov (3iov, | dkkd %pi\yL0CT s'giv 
Hpiv' aye J TctyjgT <%VoA|Aw"r#/, KT^paTj oixictt. 

W _ W W W w _ _ _ w — www 

_ W W W _ W _ W — — _ WW 

EwTTopov ti\9yi<ti 7Tt co\ypv 9 stg Ttfv | czvpiov. 

The following lines of Menander c are given by 
Stobaens, tit. 106, edit. Gesner, p. 486, b. tit. 104; 
and are inserted, from this latter author, into Le 
Clerc's edition of the Fragments of Menander and 
Philemon, p. 248. The whole consists of 19 lines 3 
of which the six first will only be here given : 

' x Ei Tig | 7i)iocrsX\9frv pot \ 9souv | Ksyoi | K^mtoov, 

w _ w w w _ _ w _ _ _ w _ 

c 'E7raV | <x7ro6u\v/]g oa)\9ig e% | ccpy/ig | Unj : 

4 "Ecr>7 | S' o Tt ccv | /3«A^, | xvoov, | 7rpoSurov, | Tpocyog % 

1 *Av9oc*j\7rQg, 'tivWog, *hi<z^ioo\vca yocp [ as ^ei. 

* Yjlu.ccQ\^voy | tovt Iq'\tiv o Tt | /3«A6/ | V lk0V) 

w _ w> _ w _ w _ -. _ w_ 

e Menander lived 320 years before our Saviour. Saxii 
Onom. first edit. p. 9. 

A The above verses, like all the other Iambic Trimeter aca* 
talectic, are capable of being thus scanned as Bacchiac : 

Ei' ii$ 7rpo7|tXSaiy fxol J Qiuv Xsyot j Kfccruv 

'Excty a.ToJGaynj av|G*j /£■ CC ?\X Y >'> ' E ' C7 '* , 

" v £c^ £' o t; a? | $yAn *y law, ^rpo£Woy, | rea-yo?, 


In addition to these instances, it is to be re- 
marked, that the TlXxrog of Aristophanes, which 
has been selected above, as approaching more 
nearly to the modern kind of Comedy, than any 
other of his works, and as being less encumbered 
with the Chorus, is described by Bisset, in an enu- 
meration at the head of each scene, in his edition of 
Aristophanes, as containing the following sorts of 
metre : 

Act I. Sc. 1. Senarii Iambici. 
2. Senarii Iambici. 

— II. — 1. Octonarii Iambici catalectici, Dime- 

tri Anacreontii, et alii quidam. 

2. Senarii Iambici. 

— — 3. Senarii. 

— 4. Senarii Iambici. 

5. Tetrametri catalectici Anapsestici 

6. Senarii Iambici. 

— IIL — I. Ejusdem generis versus ad iinem 

[sc. senarii Iambici.] 

— 2. Not mentioned, as being the same 
with the preceding. 

— 3. Senarii. 

*Ay0pw7rcj, j Wttos, $i&vow»ou J yap cri hi, 
Eljua^fjyey tout' eV|T*y o Tt j3«,Xa ^' sAov, 
''Ar«yT« jt*ft>i|?ioy, tv9v<; e»J7my ay 3o|k». 


Act IV. Sc. 1. Senarii lambici. 

— — 2. Not mentioned, as being the same 

with the preceding 1 . 

— — ~ 3. Not mentioned, for the same reason, 

• — 4. Not mentioned ^ for the same reason, 

— — 5. Senarii. 

— V. — 1. Senarii lambici. 

— — — — 2. Not mentioned, as being the same 

with the preceding. 
— — — 3. Senarii, et Anapsestici Aristophanih 

All these verses may, however, be rendered ca- 
pable of regulation as Bacchiac ; and the propriety 
of their present distribution is, therefore, ques- 
tionable. In the Iambic Trimeter, an alteration 
in the scanning only is requisite; and the two 
Tetrameter scenes, Act II. Sc. I, and Act II. 
Sc. 5, may, by a new division of the verses, be 
easily converted into Bacchiac also, as has been 
found on experiment. This circumstance of the 
possibility of two different modes of division and 
regulation, renders it necessary that the point 
should be decisively settled, which of the two 
ought to prevail as the rule ; and the question 
shall therefore be fully examined in a subsequent 
part of this Section 6 . 

e Suidas, in his Lexicon, ascribes to Aristophanes the in« 
vention of Tetrameter verse, f Evps rv? m rsTg»/*Efj)s xal oxnx* 
* ^si-py.' Suidas, art. A^ro^ay^. But he does not say of what 
kind, nor does it appear what he means by oxTaprsp, or how he 
distinguishes it from Tetrameter. Gesner, in his Bibliotheca, 


In the fifth scene of the second act, it is ma- 
nifest that the scenes are wrong divided ; and the 
distribution of the scenes, in modern editions, is 
plainly a late regulation, as there is reason to 
think the early editions and manuscripts have no 
such division. The edition of Aristophanes by 
Sigismund Gelenius, printed at Basle, by Froben, 
in 1547, in small folio % has, for instance, no dis- 

follows the same mode of expression, and, in like manner, 
without giving any explanation ; for he says, ' Aristophanes Te- 
i trametrum et Octametrum invenit.' Gesner, Biblioth. edit* 
1545, fo. 72, a. ' Floruit circa Olympiadem 114.' Ibid. But 
it should seem, from the instances already inserted in Section V. 
that Archilochus had used it long before. 

f It appears, from the dedication of this edition, addressed 
from Sigismund Gelenius, its editor, to Melancthon, that Ari- 
stophanes was first published by Marcus Musurus, from Aldus's 
press ; that Marcus Musurus was of Crete, and Gelenius's pre- 
ceptor; that the printers at Florence had afterwards added much 
in their commentaries; and that Froben and Episcopius, the 
printers of that edition of 1547, had laboured on it many years, 
and at length called in the assistance of Gelenius. Marcus 
Musurus's original Preface, in Greek, is also there inserted, 
and follows Gelenius's dedication. Gesner, in his Bibliotheca, 
edit. 1545, p. 72, a. says that nine Comedies of Aristophanes, 
with the ancient commentaries in Greek, were printed by Al- 
dus, in folio, at Venice, in 1502: and, again, with the com- 
mentaries and a copious index, &c. at Florence, in 4to. in 1515; 
that they were again printed, without the commentaries, at 
Paris, by Gormontius, in 1528, in 4to. and that their names were 
Plutus, Nebulas, lianas, Equites, Acharnes, Vespse, Aves,, 
Pax, Concionantes. The Thesmophoriazusas, that is to say, 
1 the Worshippers of Ceres,' and the Lysistrata, were sepa- 
rately published by Bernard Junta, at Florence, in 1515, in 8vo. 
from a manuscript which he had procured ' ex Urbinato bibli- 
* otheca ;' but so very corrupt was it, that the words are some- 
times mutilated. At length, all the eleven Comedies together 


tinction of Scenes, or even of Acts ; but there are 
yet in it, in particular places, marks, certainly 
intended to separate some parts from each other. 
At the end of the line, in this fifth Scene, preced- 
ing the change of verse, there is a mark for such 
a separation ; and twenty lines further, where the 
Metre again changes, there is also another similar 
mark, at which place, Bisset, hi his edition, hag 
made that Scene to end, and Act II. Scene 6, to 

If the idea that Iambic was the system of verse, 
is to be admitted, which indeed it cannot, but in 
opposition to the strongest evidence, it will be 
thought, that of the examples above inserted, the 
first from Eupolis is Trochaic Tetrameter cata- 
lectic, and it is described by Kircbner as Tro- 
chaic Tetrameter, in his Prosodia Grseca, p. 81 ; 
that the second, from the same author, is Iambic 
Tetrameter catalectic, and the third from him, 
Iambic Trimeter acatalectic. Those from Crati- 
nus and Aristophanes will, in like manner, all be 

were published at Basle, in 4to. 1532, and by Wechelus at 
Pari?. It appears, from the Preface to that edition, that Aldus 
was advised, by Theodore Gaza, to publish Aristophanes, 
Ibid. fo. 72, b. ; and Antonius Fracinus, in the Preface to the 
Florentine edition, says, he had used the assistance of ' Arse- 
' nius Cretensis, archiepiscopus Monembasiae,' when he taught, 
at Florence, those young men, whom Pope Leo had sent for 
out of the middle of Greece to restore the Greek language. 
Ibid. fol. 72, b. Bernard Junta says, in his Preface, that he had 
procured a very ancient manuscript * ex Urbinato bibliotheea.-' 
Ibid. fol. 72, b. 


considered as Iambic Trimeter, except in the first 
instance, where one line is Trochaic, as there men- 
tioned. Under the same impression, the first and 
second from Philemon, and also that from Me- 
nander, will be said to be Iambic Trimeter acata- 
lectio ; still adhering to the idea of Iambic, as the 
species of verse employed in Comedy. The TtteTog 
of Aristophanes, when correctly regulated, does 
not exhibit any change of Metre in the same 
Scene ; and the whole Comedy will be found to 
contain but one Scene of Iambic Tetrameter verse, 
and the rest are Iambic Trimeters ; for, as to the 
Anapaestic Tetrameters, as they are called, they 
are so few, and differ so little from Iambic, that 
they do not deserve notice, particularly as the 
Anapaest is one of the kinds of feet uniformly al- 
lowed as admissible in Iambic. In no one of 
these specimens is there a single instance of any 
intermixture of verses of different lengths, further 
than that some verses may be acatalectic and 
others cat alec tic, but both invariably of the same 
number of Feet or Metres. The Feet, which the 
Iambic contain, are the Tribrachys, Spondee, 
Dactyl, and Anapaest, which are also equally ad- 
mitted in the Trochaic, no occasion having occur- 
red for the introduction of the Trochee, Proce- 
leusma, or Amphibrachys, into the Iambic ; nor 
for that of the Iambus, and those other feet, into 
the Trochaic. Again, there is not, throughout the 
whole, one single violation of Metre, or Poetical 
Licence of any kind ; but it deserves remark, that 



all of them are capable of being scanned as Bac- 
chiac, and so they have been treated in a note on 

Aristotle,, in his tract, ' De Poetica, 5 p. 7 & 58 5 
Svo. Oxon. 1760, speaking of Tragedy, which he 
seems erroneously to consider as earlier than Co- 
medy, says, that the Metre in which Tragedy was 
originally written, was Tetrameter, because Poetry 
w T as satyric, and fitter for Dancing, but that it was 
afterwards changed to Iambic s. In a passage, in 
his book, ' De Rhetorice,' edit. Goulston, 4to. 
Lond. 1696, p. 195, mentioning the Trochaic 
foot, he has asserted, that the Trochee approaches 
nearer to the dance called the Cordax, that this 
appears clearly from Tetrameters, and that Tetra- 
meters are a voluble Rhythmus h . Some persons^ 

§ *'ETi as fjL£yt.Qo<; ix fjuxfZv [avQccv k&i Xz^wg <ysAo/ac, dt« to ex <rcc7V* 
4 p**S jw-ETabaXEni, 6-^e a.7r£<TE^.v«9?5* to, te [xsrgov ix tet^o^e't^ iccfx^sTov 
' zyivsro. to fxsv ydg TTptoTov T£Tpccju.£T^w fp^pwvTO, $tol to crouvgiKviv KOtl 

1 oj>;gw«cMT«fav uvea tw iroivxw. 9 —' Porro autem magnitudo a vili« 

* bus fabulis et dictione ridicula sero fiebat illostrior, eo quod 

* immutatio facta fuita Satyrica Poesh Metrum etiam ex Tetra- 

* metro redditum erat lambicum ; primo enim utebantur Tetra» 
e metro, nempe quod Poesis erat Satyrica et saltui aptior.' — • 
Aristot. De Poetica, Oxon. 8vo. 1760, p. 7 & 55. 

h ' Aio puSjUoy h.7 £%Eiy To'v Xoyov, p.*Tpy ds fj-n" ttoiy)^ <yap £$-«•<' 

* fjQuov de i*n o\xyi£wq % tSto d£ e~ca 9 lav ^Xf' TS **• 7 " v ^ pvQpwv, I /u,sV ? 
4 r^Zoq, crEjueyoj x.a\ Xnxtixog, xut txppovt'ois d£0/*Eyoj. 'O de iup£oc t cevvn 
i £<riv r) X-.^ic y raj'/ 9ro/\Awv. dlo pcchira, TravTwy twv pJrfwv }a,pQiia (p^sy 

* yovra,t XeyovTEj* d£<~ de c"c^avot*jt«. ytvscrVca xca Ixfrcrat. 'O de Tpop£a<bj, 
' jtopdaKistruTE^s* d'/jX&t oe to. TETfa^-sTga* e's"/ yap Tpx-^ oc - jwfyxos to. te- 
4 Tpct^ETpa.' — « Quamobrem Rhythmum oportet habere orationem, 
4 doli autem Metrum: sic enim Poetna erit: Neque tamen 


from this last passage, have, without sufficient, 
or, indeed, any reason, concluded that the Tetra- 
meter verse, used in Tragedy, as above mentioned, 
was Trochaic j ; but no one, besides himself, has 
ventured to go the length of Bishop Hare, who, to 
make the passage from Aristotle, De Poetica, bear 
the construction which he chose to put on it, has 
actually interpolated it with the word Tpo%o&iK%, 
which does not occur in the original !< * This word, 

' Rhythmum exquisite habere oportet. Id autem erit, si qua- 

* damtenus sit, modumque teneat* Ex Rhythmis vero Herous, 

* est grandis, et clausulam tardam habens, et harmonise indi- 
' gens. Iambus autem, est ipsa vulgi locutio, quce humitior est. 

* Quamobrem maxime prae omnibus metris aliis lambica temere 

* fundunt it, qui dicunt : Oportebat autem sermonem grandiorem 

* effici, et Auditorem percellere* Trochaeus autem, ad salta- 
i tionem Cordacem propius accedit: Id perspicuum faciunt Ta- 

* trametra ex eodem comtituta t Nam Tetrametra sunt volubilis 

* Rhythmus.' — Aristotle, De Rhetorice, edit. Goulston, 4to. 
Lond. 1696, p. 195. 

1 Mr. Tynvhitt, in his edition of Aristotle, De Poetiea, 
edit. Oxon. 1794, p. 135, gives the following note on the pas- 
sage just inserted from Aristotle, referring to the words, « To 
4 jutEv «y«p Trpwrov TETpa/x£Tpw l%pwvTo.' — ' Sive in Choricis ipsis, puta, 

* sive etiam in monodiis, in quibus histrionem ilium singulareni 

* saltatione nonnunquam usum fuisse, vero non est absimile. 
1 Saltationi autem convenire metrum Troehaicum alibi obser- 

* vavit Noster.' — Rhet. lib. iii. c. 8. " f O & t* Tpo^aTo? xop&txtxw- 

** THpoj*, oyiXoi, di T« TETpajLiSTpa* sf* yoip Tpop^fpoj p'y'rju.o; TO. TETpajlAETpa." 

* — Specimen insigne est saltationis ehoricae, metris trochaicis 

* peractae apud Aristoph. 'Etp. v. 330—335/ 

k Bishop Hare, in the prefatory tract, * De Metris Comicis, 5 
prefixed to his edition of Terence, p. xxxviii. says, * Primum 

* enim clarissimo ex Aristotelis Libro De Poetica, testimonio 
% constat Troehaicum genus fuisse antiquissimura, Hssc enim 

S 2 



it is true, he has placed in a parenthesis, a cir- 
cumstance which few readers were likely to ob- 
serve, and still fewer to understand, as no reason 
appeared why it should be so stationed. But writ- 
ing it, as Hare has done, in Greek characters, it 
is calculated to mislead the reader, as no doubt it 
has done on many occasions ; nor would this fraud, 
for it is no better, have been, perhaps, on the pre- 
sent occasion detected, if Aristotle's original work 
had not been consulted for other purposes, and 
particularly in order to ascertain what was his 
opinion as to the history of Comedy and Tragedy. 
To the supposition that the Tetrameters here 
meant were Trochaic, many strong objections ex- 
ist. Aristotle's words l , when correctly translated, 
are, that the Tragic Poets first wrote in Tetra- 
meter verse, because Poetry was satyrie, and fitter 
for Dancing. Every one knows that Tetrameter 

' ille, C. 4% To, te juefpoy ex. TETpa^xsrpy (rpo^vr-iiV.Sj IccyM^ov iys veto* to 
' [Ay yap ?rpwrov TETpajUETpa; sp/p^vro, dia to <r«Tuptjc'/j'>> kcci opp/*ir**WT££av 
4 Eivai rr/v KoiriCiv. Af'f Ek>? d\ ysvOjt/,Evy)>, avrn ?) tyvciq To oIxEtov ^.ETpov EfpE* 
4 paAtrci yap Asx.Tiy.ov twv [/.erptav to lafdotiov l~i. — The word Tpop^autf 
does not occur in the original text ; and, though it is here 
placed in a parenthesis, yet, being printed in the Greek cha- 
racter, as well as the rest, is calculated to mislead the reader, 
who may incautiously trust to it, without examining the passage, 
as given by Hare, with the original in Aristotle. 

1 ' To, t= [/.BTfov hi TETpauETpy ia.ju.b s;ov EyEysTo. to ju.3v yap crp&Tcv 
f TETPawcTpco l^fuvro, o/a no ertirvpiK'riv kcci Qp"%f\<?wMTz^w EJvaiT*jv 7ro/^o~iv. 
— s Metrum etiam ex Tetrametro redditum erat lambicum. 
4 Primo enim utebantur Tetrametro, nerape quod Poesis erat 
* Satyrica et saltui aptior.'— Aristot. De Poetica, 8vo. Oxan. 
1760, p. 7 & 59. 


verse is not peculiar to Trochaic, but prevails, 
equally, in almost, if not quite, all the other 
sorts, as it means no more than a verse of four 
feet or Metres, whatever the constituent feet or 
Metres may be, respecting which, it decides no- 
thing. Nor is there any ground to believe Tro- 
chaic verse originally a distinct sort, or more an- 
cient than Iambic ; but, on the contrary, in both 
instances, the probability lies the other w&j ; for 
it is most manifestly clear, that the Trochee is 
equal in value to the Iambus, and might and 
would, under the principle of receiving all equi- 
valent feet, be admitted into the Iambic, in ex- 
change for the Iambus. The absurdity and incon- 
sistency of receiving some equivalent feet and re- 
jecting others, have been already noticed 111 , be- 
cause, in Music, whence the rule was originally 
derived, no such exclusion takes place ; and, be- 
cause the Poets themselves, as has been shown by 
examples in a former Section n , have actually used, 
in the case of Hexameter Heroic verse especially, 
all the variations, which could be produced from 
the original feet. In fact, therefore, the Trochee 
was but one branch of the Iambic ; and so it is 
estimated by Victorinus °. Nothing can be more 

^ See Sect. VJI. n See Sect. IX. 

• ' Sed, ut jam ad conditioners Iambici Metri disciplinamque 
1 redeamus, tres ejus species, per quas profluit, enitar attin- 
4 gere, quanim prima Iambi ca, sequens Trochaica, tertia, ex 
* utroque mixta, reperitur.' Victorinus, ep!it. Putsch, col. 2571. 
•— Aristides Quintilianus, inter Antiquae Musicae Auctores Sep- 

S 7 


vague and indefinite, than the present etymology of 
its appellation, derived, as it is generally supposed 
to be, from ' Tpo%au 9 curro, festino, rotor,' which 
itself is conceived to be produced from c Tpc%w, 
€ curro V and furnishes no characteristic sufficiently 
distinct from others, or important in itself, to jus- 
tify the supposition that it was the foundation of 
its name : for, € to run, make haste, or be whirled 
* about, like a wheel/ are very indefinite propensi- 
ties ; and, if its characteristic be, as it is said 5 
that it is voluble, and fit for Dancing, it ought to 
have been characterized by some name, which 
should have shown its peculiar use and applica- 
tion ; and particularly that it was fit for Joy and 
Mirth. All sorts of measures, in Poetry, are fit 
for some kind or other of Dancing, because both 
are equally derived from the principles of Music ; 
and, therefore, Trochaic could not be distinguish- 
ed by that, as a characteristic, which was common 
to all sorts of Poetry. No doubt, some peculiar 
designation for Trochaic, would have been sought, 
from its supposed use and proper application, had 
there not existed, as there did, an insuperable im« 
pediment ; for, unfortunately, the only proper ap- 

tern, a Meibomio, vol. ii. p. 37? speaks thus i ( 'Ev ^ t<3 iaju&xu 

• In Iambico genere simplices cadunt hi Rhythmi. Iambus, ex 

* dimidia elatione, et dupla positione. Troehseus, ex dupla pb- 
f sitione et brevi elatione,' &c. 

p Schrevelii Lexicon, art. Tpo^aw, 


pellation by which it could have been thus de- 
scribed, was evidently pre-occupied by the Iambic ; 
and, therefore, the only method left, was to cha- 
racterize it as the reverse of that foot in form. 

But, if its origin is to be ascribed to Tps%^, 
how happens it, that it is usually spelt Trocheeus, 
with a diphthong-, and called Trochaicus, when 
there is no such in the original word ? This can- 
not be reconciled to any ideas of etymology ; nor 
is it necessary it should, as the word certainly 
comes from the first syllables, united, of the two 
verbs, c Tpo7T£o}jicii } retroeo, retro vertoV and ' Xaipw, 
* laetor, gaudeo, delector r .' The Iambus, derived 
from ( locivoi. (3<z{siv, leeta loqui s / had been properly 
characterized as cheerful and exhilarating. The 
Trochee, with the same propensity or tendency, 
was exactly, in the position of the long and short 
quantities, of which it consisted, the opposite or 
reverse of the Iambus ; and, if that was called 
the e cheerful/ the Trochee might, with equal pro- 
prietry, so far as regarded its form, be termed the 
' Anti-cheerful,' the e Contra-cheerful,' or the ' Re- 
e tro-cheerful :' in the same manner as the Anti- 
Bacchius has been so denominated, because it was 
the reverse of the Bacchius K 

* Schrevelii Lexicon, art. TpoTrso^a*. 
r Ibid. art. Xeufu. 

6 See before, in Section V. of this Inquiry. 

* Diomedes, edit. Putsch, col. 476, speaking of the Palim- 
bacchius, says, « Constat ex duabus longis et brevi temporum 

s 4 


If these considerations afford, as they certainly 
do, a reasonable ground for the conclusions drawn 
from them, they can leave but very little, if any, 
doubt that the invention of the Trochaic foot was 
posterior to that of the Iambic, and that Tro- 
chaic Poetry was consequently not older than 

But, besides this, Aristotle, in the passage 
above mentioned, has related that the reason for 
using Tetrameter verse was, that Poetry was saty- 
ric, and fitter for Dancing u . He had before said, 
that Tragedy was derived from the Dithyramb K , 
an hymn in honour of Bacchus ; and he has here 
said, that the Poetry was satyric, or, in other 
words, for that is the meaning, that it was em- 
ployed by the Satyrs, the supposed attendants of 
Bacchus y. It may very reasonably, therefore, be 

4 totidern, ut Natura, dictus Palimbacchius quia contrarius est 

* Bacchic.' 

u See the passage, already given in a former note. 

x c Tvjou, r zVY,g qv'j o'.tt' ccpyv.t; oci / ro!7^sa\oc~ix.'/ic^ x-cci CCVT7) xai f\ y.u) i^xdnys 
i xxi v? |u.ev a '.to tu>v l^x^o'jrxj rov diSuca^'oov, n oi &Wo tSv to, tyxXXiKO,.* 

■ — * Cum vero extemporalis esset Poesis, et Tragcedia et Co- 
4 mcedia orta fuit et paulatim utraque crevit, altera quidem, 

* ducta origine ab illis qui Dithyrambum instituerunt, altera 
< vero ab lis qui Phaiiica.'— Aristot. * De Poetica,' Svo. Oxon. 
1760, p. 6 & 58. 

y * Satyri, quia putabantur cum contis et thyrsis in Liberi 

* Patris exercitu prselia iniise, ejus generis venabula gerebant.' 
Scaliger Poetices Liber, lib. i. c. 17- — Natalis Comes, in his 
Mythologia, p. 481, edit. Geneva, 1620, says, speaking of 
Bacchus, ' Kujus Dei Satyros, et Silenos, et Lenas, et Nym- 
4 phas, et Naiades, et Tityros sacerdotes fuisse, inquit Strabo 

* libro de:imo B ' 


concluded, that any such compositions, derived 
from the attendants of Bacchus,, would naturally 
be written in such Metre as was appropriated to 
Bacchus ; and that, most certainly, was the Bac- 
chiac. From the use made of that foot by the 
Bacchants, the Bacchius is known to have had its 
name z ; and to that foot is attributed, by Bio- 
medes, the characteristic of iitness for Dancing; 
for he terms it • Bacchius, CEnotrius, Tripodius, 
,' Saltans a .' It never has been pretended, nor, in- 
deed, could any such supposition be supported, 
that Trochaic had any relation whatever to Bac- 
chus; but Scapula, in his Lexicon, which is known 
to have been surreptitiously pillaged from Ste- 
phens's Greek Thesaurus, while that was in the 
press h , thus defines (art. BxK%ewg, edit. Harmar, 
Lond. 1629, col. 239) the meaning of the term: 

z * Item pes quidam ex brevi et duabus longis constans, ut 

* pfi^wv, eo quod Hymnis in Bacchum et Dithyrambis esset usi- 

* tatissimus. Hinc TraAt/xSax/^EJOi et ajiTi£c»c%Eioj, ap. Fab. 1. ix. 
4 c. 4.'— Scapulae Lexicon, edit. Harmar, Lond. J 629, col. 239, 
sub art. Bax^oc, and that under Baxter. * Cum vero longis 

* duabus praeponitur brevis, fit Bacchius, temporum quinque, ut 

* Catones ; quia a Bacchi carminibus, seu cantilenis, quae aptis- 
4 -sime hoc metro componuntur, vel quia familiariter hie Rhyth- 

* mus Bacchantibus aptus sit.' Victorinus, edit. Putsch, col. 
2488.—' Bacchius dictus est, quod Baccho, id est, Libero Patri, 
4 accepta modulatio hujus pedis sono componebatur.' Plotius, 
edit. Putsch, col. 2626. 

a Diomedes, edit. Putsch, col. 475. 

h Moreri, Dictionnaire Historique, art. Scapula, Jean, on 
the authority of Baillet, * Jugemens des Savans/ torn, ii. part. iii. 
p. .126 & 127, n. 687, edit. Amst. 1725. 


* Item pes quidam, ex brevi et duabus longis con- 
6 stans, ut psQypwv, eo quod Hymnis in Bacchum 
' et Dithyrambis esset usitatissimus. Hinc 7tgjA///,- 
6 &ciK%sios et avTi$a,K%SLog, ap. Fab. 1. ix. c. 4.' In 
every way, therefore, both in reference to those 
by whom it was used, and in the peculiar charac- 
teristic of the Metre itself, as described by Ari- 
stotle, in the passage in his tract ' De Poetica,' 
Bacchiac Tetrameter verse completely answers his 
description ; and, for the reasons above assigned, 
which, if necessary, might also be supported by 
others, there is surely very strong ground to be-» 
lieve that the Tetrameters here spoken of, were 
not Trochaic, but Bacchiac. 

Aristotle has, most absurdly, attributed the rise 
of Comedy to the Phallica c , a set of obscene rites, 
adapted to no purpose so properly, as the destruc- 
tion of all Morality and Virtue, together with all 
sense of Decency, under the pretence, at the same 
time, of Religious Worship d . With these Rites, for 

e Aristotle's words are as follow, speaking of Tragedy ': 

Ttvo[Atvr,$ iv o-tt' a-gx^s aoroarxsh«rix/in<; i ccvtyi act r> ■KwpvSia, ko>a n 
[Av a.7ro tSv sfa^ovrwy Toy $i9upa^,£ov, rt 6's o-tto twv ra Qc&XXuiM) a ETfe 
xal vZv h Tto'Kka.'is rm ToAswy Siapim vopi%v[ji.tvot 9 xctra, jiujt-ov riv^n 
irgoayorrow ocrot iy/yv eto ^avspov aur^.' — * Cum vero extemporalis 
esset Poesis, et Tragcedia et Comcedia orta fuit et paulatim 
utraque crevit, altera quidem, dicta origine ab 1111s qui Dithy- 
rambum instituerunt, altera vero ab iis qui Phallica (quae ad» 
hue apud multas urbes valent legibus sancita), Poetis amplifl- 
cantibus quicquid antea notum fuit.'— Aristotle, De Poetica, 
Oxon. 1760, p. 6 & 58. 

d < Phallica, Bacchi sacra, apud Athenienses, in quibus 


this reason, every man of common Sense must of 
course have been disgusted; and so calculated 

' phallos, thyrsis alligatos, solemniter gestabant.' Littleton's 
Diet. — " Fuerunt et Phallica in Dionysi honorem instituta, qua?, 

* apud Athenienses, agebantur, apud quos primus Pegasus iile 

* Eleutheriensis Bacchi cultum instituit, in quibus cantabant, 

* quemadmodum Deus hie morbo Athenienses liberavit, et 

* quemadmodum multorum bonorum author rnortalibus extitit. 
' Fama est enim, quod Pegaso imagines Dionysi ex Eleutheris 

* civitate Boeotiae in Atticam regionem portante, Athenienses 

* Deum neglexerunt ; neque, ut mos erat, cum pompa accepe- 

* runt, quare Deus indignatus pudenda hominum morbo infes- 
6 tavit, qui erat illis gravissimus ; tunc, eis ab oraculo quo pacta 

* liberari possent petentibus responsum datum est, ut solum esse 
6 remedium malorum omnium, si, cum honore et pompa, Deum 
€ recepissent, quod factum fuit. Ex ea re, turn privatim turn 

* publice, lignea virilia thyrsis alligantes per earn solemnitatera 

* gestabant : fuit enim Phallus vocatum membrum virile.' Na- 
talis Comes, lib. v. cap. xiii. p. 491, edit. 8vo. Geneva, 1620. 
—In reading this passage, it is impossible not to perceive that 
the several events are most evidently borrowed from the punish- 
ment of the Philistines, at Ashdod, as related in the fifth and 
sixth chapters of the First Book of Samuel; and which appears 
there to have taken place, according to the chronology inserted 
in the margin of the 4to. editions of the Bible, about 1141 
years before our Saviour; but Helvicus does not place the 
capture of the ark earlier than about 1 102 years before 
the birth of Christ. See Helvici Chronologia, edit. fo. Oxon. 
1662, p. 38. It is certain that the Phallica bear no resemblance 
to Comedy ; and, therefore, it could not be derived from them. 
But it is probable that Poems, relating the events of private in- 
dividuals, and not the actions of heroes and public characters, 
might, to distinguish them from Heroic Poetry, where great 
and glorious achievements were described, be termed (pavX^cc, 
from <pa.v\o<;, privatus ; and that from these (puv\ix.a, and not 
from the Phallica, Comedy might be derived ; Aristotle having 
apparently mistaken QclvXikcl for Phallica. 


were they, in fact, to inspire abhorrence, that the 
promoters of them were unable to procure their 
reception without practising a fraud, to deter the 
people from rejecting them. What this fraud was, 
jnay be seen in the note; nor is it probable that 
Kites, received with so much reluctance, and with 
little, short of force, and so shocking in themselves 
to all sense of Morality and Decency, could either 
naturally, or in any way, have been made the 
foundation for what might merit esteem. But 
Aristotle seems to have been grossly mistaken, 
and to have erred unpardonably, as will be seen 
from tracing the source of his failure. Comedy, 
as relating to private persons and private transac- 
tions, by which circumstance Diomedes has dis- 
tinguished it from Tragedy , might perhaps have 
been sometimes, probably, described by the ad- 
jective <pavXi7ta, from ' <pa.vXog, privatus 1 ? This Ari- 
stotle seems to have corrupted to Phallica, which 
he considered as the name of the Rites of Priapus 
themselves; and thence to have inferred, that from 
them Comedy had its rise. However, from these 
circumstances, and probably because, as De- 
mosthenes has mentioned, both Comedies and 
Tragedies were represented at Athens during the 
continuance of the feasts of Bacchus", Aristotle 

e * Comcedia est privates civilisque fortunae, sine periculo 
' vitae, comprehension — Diomedes, edit. Putsch, col. 485. 

f 4 $auXo 4 -, Vilis, nullkis pretii, abjectus, humilis, contemptus.' 
— Scapula, Lexicon, art. $«y?ws. 

s Hoffman, in his Lexicon Universale, art. Bacchi Thea- 


appears to have entertained an idea, that both 
Tragedy and Comedy were in some way or other 
attributable to Bacchus' 5 . Certain it is, that the 
Romans, in after-times, so far acknowledged the 
connexion, as to place on the Stage, during the 
performance of a Comedy, an altar to Bacchus, as 
well as one to the peculiar deity to whose honour 

trum, says, speaking of that edifice, * Cujus mentio in L. me- 
' morata Demostheni in Midiana : "Orav *» 'Tto^ir-n tw Alovvctu h 

' TLticccis'i ot ¥Lu!^uiooi aoa iiti A'avohv 7roju.7rn x.cci li Tpctyudoi hi 
1 'Kojy.vcio} jc«* to?? tv ar^ Aiovva-lo^ ri 7ro[A~vi xa.i 6t ircuois xa,l 6 Kwy^f 

* Y.VA ot Kw^iuooi x.a» ot Tectyuoot y.cci QagyriXtuv rr, Ttoy.Kvi %.cci iw a.yuvi t 
' {jlvtz V^mau [xyitb sys^upowai ..... ev raytrcug vciTg riyjpa.ic,'' &C. 

The rest of the passage, though given by Hoffman, is here 
omitted as not to the present purpose ; but of the foregoing 
part, Hoffman gives the following translation : ' Cum Pomps 

* Libero ducitur in Piraeo, agunt Comcedi et Tragcedi ; item 
' Lenaea pompa, et agentibus Tragcedis atque Comoedis. Asty- 
< corum quoque Liberalium pompa, saltante puerorum Choro 
' dum fit Comus aguntque Comcedi et Tragcedi ; Thargeliorura 

* item pompa et certamine : neque pignus capito .... istis die- 

* bus,' &c. 

h Vossius, Institut. Poetic. 4to. Amst. 164-7, lib. ii. p. 8, 
after inserting a passage from Plato, says, « Quibus verbis do- 
' cet, Bacchum cum Apolline et Musis, velut ministros, munere 
1 Deorum concessos esse hominibus, quo se diebus festis exhi- 

* lararent. Antiqui vero, ut est apud Athenaeum in ix. praecipue 

* hunc honorem tribuerunt Baccho, ut qui vinum largitus esset, 
' et festum hoc instituisset. Unde et poesin ^pa^aT*xnv Baccho 
' sacrarunt ; et cum ea discerpta esset in plura genera, etiam a 
' Bacchi comitibus Satyris et Silenis Satyricam et Sillos dixere/ 
Among the Prolegomena to the edition of Terence, 1479, sig, 
a 4- a, are these words, speaking of Tragedy, i Qui ludi, quum 

* per artifices in honorem Liberi Patris agerentur, etiam ipsi 

* Comcediarum TragcediarumquescriptoreshujusDei, velut prae* 

* sens, numen colere venerarique cceperunt.' 


the Rites were dedicated which were then dele- 
gating * e 

1 * In omnibus enim scenis, altare Bacchi sacrum erat, 

* teste Donato/ Hoffman, aft- Comoedia, in bis Lexicon Uni- 
versale, coL 94-5. — * In Scena duae arse poni solebant, dextera 
4 Liberi, sinistra ejus Dei, cui iudi fiebant.' Donati Fragmentum 
De Comoedia et Tragcedia, inter Prolegomena Terentiana, pre- 
fixed to the Delphin edition, 8vo« Lond. 1792, p. xxix. Among 
« Iodoci Badii Ascensii Praenotamenta,' prefixed to the edition 
of Terence, Lugduni, 1527, in cap. xL entitled * De Proscenio- 

* rum Ornatu et Instructione/ are these words: * In dextra 

* parte Proscenii ara erat Liberi Patris, in sinistra Apollinis.' In 
the prefatory tract, entitled ' Fabula, Comcedia, et Tragcedia, 

* item ex Donato et aliis,' prefixed to the edition of Terence^ 
Ex Bibliotheca Aldina, Venetiis, 1570, is to be found, p. 12, a. 
the following passage: ' Sed et in Scena duae arae poni solebant, 

* dextra Libero, sinistra ejus Dei, cui Ludi fiebant, unde in 
a Andria, Terentius ait i 

" Ex ara bine sume verbenas." 

The editor of the Delphin edition of Horace endeavours thus* 
in the following note on v. 275 of the Art of Poetry, to trace 
the connexion between Bacchus and Comedy i 

* Ignotum Tragicae genus invenisse Camoenae 

' Dicitur, et plaustris vexisse poeraataj Thespis, 

* Quee canerent, agerentque, peruncti fseeibus ora.' 

* 275. Tragicae genus invenisse.] Libet altiiis repetere originem 
6 Tragcediae ac dramatum. Bacchus Icarium docuerat plantare 
s vites. Hie in Attico agro hireum vineae depopulantem Bac- 
4 cho mactavit, convocatis ad sacrificium vicinis, qui choreis 
' et cantilenis Dei, lastitiae datoris vindictam, celebrarunt. Reli- 

* giose illud etiam quotannis vindemiarum tempore fieri placuity 

* turn in pagis turn subinde in urbibus. Mox cceperunt scribere 

* certatim poetae rpaywSiav, id est, carmen hirci, vel de hirco, 
$ quod a Choro decantatum. Postea illis carminibus Baccho 

* sacris inserta, addita, substituta, et quaedam alia fuerunt ; 
4 atque etiam dialogi, inter duos aut plures. Hincque natum 

* Drama, turn Comicum, turn Tragicum, turn Satyricum. Quod 


The possibility of scanning some verses, either 
as Iambic or Bacchiac, has been already shown in 
Section XX. ; and as nothing but erroneous prac- 
tice can flow from incorrect and fallacious prin- 
ciples, it is necessary to consider distinctly what 
reasons, in the case of Comic Metre, can be urged 
for or against the reception or rejection of either. 
It is no sufficient answer to stop the progress of 
such an inquiry to say, that Comic Verse has been 
hitherto considered as Iambic, because the ques- 
tion, whether it might not have been Bacchiac^ 
has not hitherto been raised; and consequently 
the claims of this latter to the preference have not 
as yet undergone investigation. The opinion in 
favour of Iambic does not, therefore^ amount to 
conviction: the point is still open to examination^ 

' ad inventorem spectat, certe, ante Thespiiri, fuerunt Drama- 
' tici rudiores quidam, at ille nominatur auctor, quomam unum 
' Actorem induxit, qui dum chorus, Bacehi laudes canens, pau- 

* latim interquiesceret, herois aut summi cujuspiam viri, insigne 

* aliquid facinus carmine celebrabat. Alia insuper ornamenta 
' subjunxit, quibus Tragcedia illustrata est.' Another note, in 
the same edition, referring to the last of the above lines, is in 
these words : < 277. Peruncti fsecibus ora.] Ideo Thespis alii- 

* que vultu cerussa vel minio vel fsece peruncti, dicteriis obvios 

* quosque incessebant, ut imitarentur Silenum rubicundum, Sa«< 
' tyrosque dicaces, Bacehi socios, et ministros. Illos Aristo- 

* phanes Tpuyo^u/xovaj vocabat. Gall. " des diables berbeiiillez de 
" lie." Angl. " Merry Andrews, bedaubed with lees." Vini an 
< olei fsecibus ungerent se histriones, disceptant, fatali more suo, 

* Grammatici et nugas nugis addunt, inquit Scaliger, pauh>< 

* ante citatus.' — A different etymology of the name Tragedy- 
has already been given in Sect. XII. 


for which indeed it seems imperiously to call; and 
the favourite tenet cannot receive any support from 
the prejudice on its side, because it is the object 
of that inquiry to invalidate and shake the pre- 
tensions of that very prejudice. If it cannot de- 
fend itself, it can by no means afford protection 
to any thing else - 9 and no precedent or supposed 
authority, for none of real weight can exist in such 
a case,, can be claimed, in opposition, as it would 
foe, to every dictate of Reason k . 

In every case but where they consist, which 
they very rarely, if ever do, of six Iambuses l ; and 
even then it may be doubtful whether they are 
correct ; Iambic Trimeter aeatalectic verses will, 
as has been found on experiment 111 , scan as Bac- 
chiac Tetrameter catalectic ; and, of course, they 
will be by every person referred to the one or other 
of those sorts, according to the previous ideas of 
those persons, as to which of the two was intended 

k ' In re magna vincat Ratio authoritatem.' Plin. Jul. 1. i. — 

* Rationi nullius auctoritas prsejudicare debet.' Jo. Sarisburi- 
ensis PoJycraticus, edit. 12mo. Lugd. Bat. 1595, p. 380. — e Sic 

* ergo legantur, ut auctoritas non prsejudicet Rationi.' Ibid. p. 
380. — * Bene adhibita, Ratio cernit quod optimum sit; neglecta, 
4 multis implicatur erroribus/ Cic. 4< Tusc. 

1 Bishop Leng has noticed, that he found but one verse 
throughout Terence, consisting wholly of the Iambus, and that 
verse he has given, but it is not a decisive instance, because 
one of the syllables is not necessarily short, but common; 
and if it is considered as long, the foot ceases to be an Iambus* 
smd becomes a Spondee. See a former note on Section XIX, 

m See Sect. XIX. and Sect, XXIX. infra, 



as the rule. Considering- this as an abstract 
question, what species of verse was in its own na* 
ture the fittest for the purpose^ there does not seem 
any reason why the preference should be given to 
Iambic. Cicero n and Terentianus Maurus ° have 
said, which indeed is highly probable and reason- 
able in itself, that the object of the Dramatic 
Poets was as nearly as possible to represent fa-» 
miliar conversation ; and Aristotle has affirmed, 
that of all metres Iambic approaches nearest to that; 
and that men in common conversation frequently 
used Iambic verse, but not Heroic Hexameter p. The 

n * Itaque video visum esse nonnullis Platonis et Democriti 
i locutionem, etsi absit a versu, tamen quod incitatius feratur 
4 et clarissimrs verborum hominibus citatur potius poema pu« 

* tandum, quam comicorurci poetarum, apud quos, nisi quod 

* versiculi sient nihil est aliud quotidiani dissimile sermonis.' 
Cicero, Orator, edit. Glasg. 1748, p. 35, sect. 20. — « At conii- 

* corum senarii, propter similitudinem sermonis, sic saepe sunt 
' abjecti, ut nonnunquam vix in his numerus, aut versus, intel- 
' ligi possit.' Ibid. p. 96, sect. 55. 

' Sed qui pedestres fabulas socco premunt, 

' Ut quae loquuntur sumpta de Vita putes,' &c. 

Terentianus Maurus, edit. Putsch, col. 2443. Again, a few 
lines below : 

* In metra peccant arte non inscitia,- 
' Kc sint sonora verba consueturiinis, 

1 Paulumque rursus a solutis differant.' 

p c Afffttf d£ ytvoy.tvn~;, cevrri 7) Quci; to oly.uov ^.srpov syps* fjt.x,?uro(r 
yup XsKTtxov Twy fjiiTfM to /a^Etoy Is - *, a-rij^vov $\ rovrov, TrXfTf a yctp 

4 kx\ t\tea/yovT£5 ir,^ Xextoc^- apjuoy/a?.' Aristotle, De Poetica, edit. 
Oxon. 1760, p. 7* — * Institufea autem dictione, ipsa Natura pro- 

* prium metrum invenit. Omnium enim metrorum maxime collo- 


impropriety of Heroic Hexameter verse, no man 
will be inclined to question; but Iambic is not the 
nearest approach to common conversation. It has 
more of apparent regularity and harmony, than 
the Bacchiac or Pseonic; and would, therefore, 
have an appearance of more labour and study. 
The object which the Comic Writers had in view, 
which Terentianus Maurus thus describes, 

' Ne sint sonora verba consuetudinis,' 

would best be answered by that kind of metre, 
which, while it was still metre, and so gave a degree 
of elegance to the dialogue, as requiring it to be 
more smooth in style, was yet the least harmonious 
as poetry, and therefore bore the nearest resem- 
blance to elegant prose. There is no doubt, that, in 
this point, Bacchiac, or Peeonic, has the advantage ; 
and as little can it be supposed, that, when the 
difference was so great, and the reason so strong for 
preferring this last, the Poets should have injudi- 
ciously chosen the worst, and, without any ground, 
have adopted Iambic. Neither has Iambic, in its 
nature or history, any connexion whatever with 
the subjects or history of Comedy, or any relation 
to its inventor, that should operate as a reason 
for employing it. Aristotle, when relating that 

1 qirio accommodatum est Xambicum. Hoc vero inde manifes- 
* turn est, quod in mutuo sermone plurimis Iambis utimur, 
' hexametris autem raro et a sermone communi aberrantes*'— 

Ibid, p. 59. 


Tragedy had improved in dignity, by a change 
from a low plot and ridiculous diction, notices, as 
one instance, the change of the metre from Te- 
trameter to Iambic, which certainly implies that 
he thought Iambic metre suited to the dignity of 
Tragedy ^ : at another, he says that it was calcu- 
lated for railing and reproach r : on a third occa- 
sion, that it is the mere style of the vulgar, and 
therefore not suited to public speaking s ; and on a 
fourth, that it is fitted for conversation 1 : but these 
are evidently contradictory to each other, and 
therefore not deserving of notice. 

The arguments in favour of Bacchiac are 
founded on the following facts, all of which 
have most evidently a close connexion with the 

q ' y ETt ^s ju./ys0o£ ejc /uwpwv p$w kou Xsf ew$ ytXoicx,^ hot, to ex. aarv 
1 fiKOv prraJoctkiiV) o\z ocTricrsixi^vu^n' to, te jxtrpov ejc TETpaf/.ETpoD ?«^x- 
' Giw lytviTo' — * Porro autem magnitudo a vilibus fabulis et dic- 
' tione ridicula sero fiebat illustrior, eo quod immutatio facta 

* fuit a Satyrica Poesi : metrum etiam ex Tetrametro redditum 

* erat Iambicum.'— Aristot. De Poetica, Oxon. 17G0, p. 7 & 59. 

r * 'Ev oi$ (speaking of compositions calculated for censure 
' and reproach) kki to o>^6ttov \a.p£itov ^x0e ysTpo-r ho xocl la^uov 
6 kkXiTtcu yuv, ot* h tw piryu tstw <a/x£i£ov aXX^Xovs.' — ' Quibus con- 

* venientius videbatur metrum Iambicum : quapropter nunc 

* etiam vocatur Iambicum, eo quod hoc metro convicia mutuo 

* fundebant.'— Aristot. De Poetica, Oxon. 1760, p. 6 & 57. 

s ' O $\ 'iccjaGo?, avrv) Ef^v n Xffi? 7i tuv woXKuv.' — c Iambus autem, 

* est ipsa vulgi locutio.' — Aristole, De Rhetorice, edit. Goul- 
ston, 4to. Lond. 1696, p. 195, 

* 4 MoiTuj-et yap XsxTixcy twv jotETpwv to 'ujjJo'ziov Ij-i. 9 — ' Omnium 

* enim metrorum maxime, colloquio accommodatum est Iambi- 

* cum,'— Aristot. De Poetica, Oxon, 1760, p. 7 & 59. 

T 2 


history of Comedy : Originally Comedy and Tra- 
gedy appear to have been so far, at least, consi- 
dered as derived from Bacchus, that they were 
performed at Athens at his feasts u . It is more rea- 
sonable, therefore, to suppose that the Poets should 
have employed Bacchiac metre, as peculiar to the 
Poems in honour of that Deity % than any other with 
which he had no connexion, like the Iambic or 
Trochaic. Comedy was the eider invention of the 

u Hoffman, in his Lexicon Universale, art. Bacchi Thea- 
trum, says, speaking of that edifice, ' Cujus mentio in L. me- 

* niorata Demostheni in Midiana, Ct "OTav 4 tto/xtt^ tw Aiovva-u h 
c Tlupcau ymi ot 'Kiafjiwdoi act Arivxiw 'xojxit'fi x.ou hi Tpaywdb* xa< ot 

* Kw/xw^oi Kca toTc" iv »fEt Atovvaiotg w vtojJiTcri acci ot vS,tds<; koci 6 Kw^t-oj 
' y,ai ot Kw^twooi ;tai oi Tpaywdo; kcu OapyviXiuv tvj 7io\L r r;'v\ y,oit tw uywyif 

* [Avtrz t%uvou [xriTt ht^vp octroi £v rccvTaig rouq •n^.ipa.i^ &C— - 

* Cum pompa Libero ducitur in Piraeo, agunt Comcedi et Tra- 

* gcedi ; item Lenaea pompa, et agentibus Tragcedis atque Co- 
' mcedis. Astycorum quoque Liberalium pompa, saltante pue- 
' rorum Choro dum fit Comus, aguntque Comoedi et Tragcedi ; 

* Thargaliorum item pompa et certamine : neque pignus capito 
6 istis diebus,' &c. 

x ' Cum vero longis duabus pra^ponitur brevis, fit Bacchius, 

* temporum quinque, ut Catones, quia a Bacchi carminibus seu 

* cantilenis quse aptissime hoc metro componuntur, nomen ac- 
' cepit, vel quia familiariter hie rhythmus Bacchantibus aptus 
« sit.' Victorinus, edit. Putsch, col. 2488. — ' Bacchias dictus 

* est, quod Baccho, id est, Libero Patri accepta modulatio 
' hujus pedis sono componebatur.' Plotius, edit. Putsch, 
col. 2626.— ' Baccliius, (Enotrius, Tripodius, Saltans, quern 
fc Grseci Pariambum dicunt, constat ex brevi et duabus longis, 

* temporum quinque, ut Agenor, Athenae; dictus Trapct ret? j3ax%a;» 
i qui a Bacchantibus convenienter componebatur.' — Diomedes, 
edit. Putsch, col, 475. 


two>': Tragedy was not invented till at least- 
twenty, or perhaps more, years afterwards z . Tra- 
gic verse is decidedly affirmed, by Aristotle, to 
have been originally Tetrameter a ; and this was 
probably Bacchiac, because of its original refer- 
ence to Bacchus b . Afterwards, as Aristotle says, 
it was changed to Iambic ; but he does not notice 
at what time the change took placed This last 
fact is, however, doubtful; because Iambic Tri- 
meter acatalectic verses will, as it has proved on 
experiment, in all cases scan as Bacchiac d , except 
where the feet are all Iambuses. And it is not 
known that a verse all Iambuses will be found so 
certain as not to admit of correction e . If it had a 
Spondee, Dactyl, or Anapaest, in any one of the five 
first feet, it would scan as Bacchiac. So will also 
a catalectic Iambic 'JVimeier, if any two of the 
first five feet consist of Spondees, Dactyls, or Ana- 

y Between 318 and 297 years before the Parian Chronicle, 
which itself was written 265 before the time of our Saviour. 
See the authorities already cited in Section XII. 

z 273 years before the writing of the Parian Chronicle. Se-e 
the authorities already cited in Section XII. 

a Aristotle, De Poetica, edit. Oxon. 1760, p. 7. See the 
passage in this Section. 

b See Victorinus, edit. Putsch, col. 2488, and Plotius, edit. 
Putsch, col. 2626. Both passages have been given in a former 
note on this Section. 

c Aristotle, De Poetica, p. 7. See the passage in a former 
note on this Section. 

d So will Trochaic Trimeters, in all instances, even where 
all the feet are Trochaic. 

e £>ee a note already inserted on Section XIX, 

T 3 


psests f . As Tragedy was only a subsequent varia- 
tion from Comedy, so far as it respected the events 
to be exhibited, it was surely more probable that 
the inventor of Tragedy, considering that, also, 
like Comedy, conducted in dialogue, should em- 
ploy the same kind of metre as had before been 
used in Comedy. What that was, it is true Ari- 
stotle has not mentioned ; but Crates is expressly 
said, by Aristotle £, to have rejected, or rather 
not to have used the Iambic form. If so, in what 
kind of verse did he write ? for, as Tragedy was 
certainly invented before his time, and in verse, it 
is highly improbable he should have' written in 
prose. The kind of verse used in Tragedy, which 
was the later invention, and, indeed, derived from 
Comedy, was not Iambic but Tetrameter h ; and 
that, most probably, for the reasons before assign- 
ed, Bacchiac or Pseonic. What, therefore, could 
have been the kind of verse used by Crates in 
Comedy, but the same Tetrameter verse with that 
originally prevailing in Tragedy ? And Aristotle 
has never said, nor, indeed, is there any reason 
for such a supposition, that, in Comedy, as iti Tra- 

f It is the same case with a Trochaic Trimeter catalectic, if 
only one of the five first feet be a Spondee, &c. 

* naGoXy ivoiih Xoyy? r> /xy9a?.' Aristot. De Poetica, edit. Oxon ? 
p. 8.—* Atheniensium autem primus sermones aut Fiibulas com* 

* posuit Crates, missa omnino forma Iambica.' IbicL p. 60. 

h Aristotle, De Poetica, edit. Oxon. p. 7. See the passaga 
inserted before, in a note on this Section* 


gedy, the verse was changed to Iambic. Nor is 
the authority of the division sufficiently established 
to justify an idea that the Tetrameter Iambic or 
Trochaic verses, if ever they apparently occur, are 
rightly distributed, and not rather capable of be- 
ing regulated as Iambic or Trochaic Trimeter, as 
some persons, though erroneously, would perhaps 
be inclined to call them ; in which case it would 
be equally possible to render them, like the rest of 
the Trimeters, Bacchiac or Pseonic Tetrameters. 

These observations, though here confined solely 
to Greek Comic verse, are yet equally applicable 
to Greek Tragic metre also, as has already been 
shown in the preceding Section ; and it cannot be 
denied that the facts already stated, should they 
even, on account of early prejudices, fail of pro- 
ducing full conviction, are yet sufficiently strong to 
justify and require some hesitation or pause in the 
mind of every one, before he ventures to advance 
or hazard the assertion that either the Greek Tra- 
gic or Comic verse was intended to be Iambic. 

The question as to the nature of Latin Comic 
verse, depends also, besides these, on other cir- 
cumstances, peculiar to itself, which must all be 
fully considered^ together with the original facts, 
before a correct judgment can be formed. None 
of them, however, tend in any way to counte- 
nance the idea that Greek Comic verse, as the 
original from which the Latin was borrowed, was 
either really in itself, or conceived to have been, 
Iambic, On the contrary, the practice of the 



Romans on that point, if it can be said to be in 
any respect applicable to the nature of Greek Co- 
mic verse, would rather lead any one to decide in 
favour of Bacchiac. But nothing* further on the 
subject is here requisite, than to mention that the 
nature of Latin Comic verse will be separately 
and distinctly examined in a subsequent Section 
destined to that purpose* 



Latin Comic Verse, Specimens of. 

Verses supposed Iambic Trimeters, will scan as Bacchiae Te« 
trameter.— A specimen from Plautus so treated. — Examples 
of verses rightly supposed Bacchiae from Plautus. — 
Instances of the like kind from Terence. — These verses, 
however apparently different from the Greek specimens 
given in Section XX. may still perhaps be derived from the 
same source. — Imagined Pseonic or Bacchiae, and why. 

In a former Section specimens have been given from 
the Greek Comic authors, in order to show what 
species of Metre they employed. A similar me- 
thod shall now be pursued with respect to the La- 
tin Poets of that description; by which means an 
opportunity will also be afforded of comparing the 
two systems of versification with each other. 

It is certainly true, that, on many, occasions, 
the same verse may be scanned in two very differ- 
ent ways ; and, according to the manner in which 
it shall be thus regulated, will of course be the 
decision of what nature it is to be deemed '. lam- 

\ Victorinus, edit. Putsch, col. 2493, cites the following verse; 

" Armiger in Ida pede vago littora petens," 

«pn which he remarks in the following words; * Si ut Tro.- 


bic Trimeter verses, for instance, will also scan as 
Bacchiac Tetrameter, as is apparent from the fol- 
lowing lines, which are part of the Prologue to 
Plautus's Amphitruo, and have hitherto passed for 
the former sort. How properly they have been thus 
received, may be doubtful ; but at present they are 
only here given as instances to prove the above 
fact. Scanned as Iambic, they would be as follow : 

* Ut vos | in vosltns vol|tis mer]eimo;niis 

6 Emunjdis venldundislque me | laetum | lucris 

* Afficelre atque ad|juva|re in re|bus omjnibus 

* Et ut | res ratilonesjque vesjtrorum om|nium 

* Bene exlpedilre vol|tis perejgreque et | domi 

5 Bonolque atque amlplo auctalre per|petuo 1 lucro.* 

As Bacchiac they would be thus : 

Ut vos in | vostris vo!|tis merciimoniis 
Emundis | vendundislque me laeltum lucris 
AfBcere atlque adjuvalre in rebus | omnibus 
Et ut res | rationes|que vestro|rum omnium 
Bene expedite voltis | peregreque et | domi 
Bonoque at|que amplo auctalre perpetulo lucro. 

1 chaicum scandas, erunt omnes conjugationes a Trochaeo et 

* Anapaesto; si contra ut a trisyllabo ineipias, erunt omnes con- 

* jugationes ex Dactylo et Iambo, et efficietur Iambicus versus.' 
The same autbor, Victorinus, edit. Putsch, col. 2595, says, 

* Versus quoque hendecasyllabus Sapphicus varia scandendi divi- 
' sione, diversis inter se metris, communis reddetur.' In proof 
of which, he remarks, that, scanned in one manner, it would be 
rendered Ithyphallic, in another, Phalaecian, In another place, 
col. 2566, he says that Phalaecian verse is called Ithyphallic, if 
it is concluded with three Trochees, 


Multitudes of such ambiguous verses might be 
produced, which can decide nothing as to the sys- 
tem pursued, because they want some additional 
circumstance to determine how they themselves 
are to be understood. Such verses only shall, 
therefore, be mentioned on the present occa- 
sion, as furnish in themselves some reason for 
referring them rather to one class than another ; 
and these will probably decide the fate of the 

In the first scene of his Amphitruo, Plautus 
uses these, which, like all the rest here inserted, 
have been scanned, in order that the reader may 
more immediately perceive their nature. 

* Haec heri im|modestia | coegit | me qui hoc 

* Noctis a | portu ingra|tis exciitavit 

i Nonne idem hoc | luci me | mittere pojtuit 

* Opulento hojmini hoc magis | servitus J dura est 

* Hoc magis | miser est dijvitis serjvos 

* Noctesque diiesque assidu|o satis | superque est 

* Quo facto aut | dicto adest | opus quieltus ne sis 
' Ipse domilnus dives ojperis et la|boris expers 

1 Quodcunque homilni accidit | libere | posse retur 

' iEquum esse pultat non repujtat 3abo|ris quid sit 

' Nee asquum an|ne iniquum im'peret co'gitabit 

4 Ergo in serlvitute exlpetunt mul,ta iniqua 

*■ Habendum et | ferendum hoc o]nus est cum | labore 

1 Satis est me | queri illo | modo ser|vitutem hodie k 

k The first words of this line are in most, if not all, of the 
printed editions, given \ Satius est,' instead of * Satis est,' to 
which, for the following causes, it has here been found neces- 
sary, on every ground of Reason, to alter them, as they do not 


* Qui fuerim J liber earn | nunc potilvit pater 

* Servitu|tis hie qui J verna natus [ est queritur.* 

In the same scene., a little further on, are these 
lines : 

' Postquam utnnjque exitum est | maxima j copia 

* Disperti(ti viri | dispertiiti ordines 

* Nos nostras [ more nosjtro et modo injstruximus 

* Legiones | item hostes | contra sujas instruunt 

* Deinde utrijque imperaltores in | medium exeunt 

* Extra turibam ordinum | colloquunitur simul 

* Convenit | victi utri j sint eo | praelio 

* Urbem agrum a'ras focos | seque uti | dederent 

* Postquam id acltum est tubas ujtrinque canunt 1 contra 

* Consonat | lerra clajmorem utrinjque efferunt 

convey the meaning obviously intended. Mercury does not 
mean to say he himself had better complain of being reduced to 
servitude, because he had been free, since Sosia, who had been 
born to servitude, complained of it ; but he evidently means to 
compare himself and Sosia, not as similar, but dissimilar in- 
stances., for the purpose of showing that Sosia was unreason- 
able, and to point out that, if he, Mercury himself, complained 
of servitude, there might be reason and justice in that, because 
lie was accustomed and entitled to freedom. On the contrary, 
such a complaint from Sosia he intends to show unjust, because 
he was born a servant, and therefore experienced nothing but 
what, from the time of his birth, he ought to have expected. 
The passage, therefore, should undoubtedly stand as in the text, 
and be thus translated : * It is sufficient, if I should complain of 

* servitude in this manner, who was this day free; and by my 

* servitude my father is now benefiting. But this man, who was 

* born a servant, thinks fit to complain.' Besides this, the verse, 
-of whatever kind it is thought, will not, without a Licence, ad- 
mit * Satius,' but requires it to be read ' Satis,' which it may ? 
without any Licence of any k'md. 


« Xmpera|tor utrin[que hinc et il|linc Jovi 
4 Vota susicipere horta're exerci|tum 

* Pro se quisjque id quod quislque potest et | valet 

* Edit ferjro ferit | tela fran|gunt boat 

i Ccelum fremi|tu virum ex | spiritu et an|helitu 

* Nebula con'stat cadunt [ vulneris | vi et virium 

* Denique ut j voluimus | nostra supe'rat manus 
6 Hostes creibri cadunt | nostri con!tra ingruunt 
' Vicimus 1 vi fero;ces l 

1 This line is evidently defective, and wants three syllables 
to complete it, a circumstance thus probably to be accounted 
for : from the sense and measure, there is reason to think it 
originally stood thus : 

{ Viciraus vi feroccs feroces,* 

and would then signify, ' We, the fierce, by force overcame the 
* fierce.' Similar modes of expression frequently occur, where 
a play upon two words seems evidently intended, as ' Fortei 
' fortis amat.' Of the same sort, as to the mode of expression, 
are the two following lines, which occur in the Poetee Minores 
Grasci, a Winterton, 12mo. Cantab. 1635, p. 532: 

' Ec-'oXuJ -yap avtffi EsrvAa yjau oi^oT 0£of«* 

' Vir bonus bonum nunquam odit.' 

* Bono quidem vivo bona etiara dat Deus.' 

And in the following of Horace, Carm. lib. iv. Ode IV. v. 29 : 

' Fortes creantur fortibus et bonis.' 

But the copyist, finding the word * feroces ' occur twice, imme- 
diately in succession, ignorantly conceived the last redundant^ 
and consequently rejected it as an error of some former copyist. 
If the second word ' feroces ' is omitted, the sense and metre 
are both defective : if it is received, both are complete, and 
the line is of the same length and metre as those which precede 
it ; besides that, in the latter case, the expression is much more 
forcible : so that the sense, as well as metre, is considerably be- 
nefited by the change. 


* Sect in iugam j se nemo | tamen con|vortitur 

* Nee receidit loco | quin statim | rem gerat 

* Animum amititunt priusjquam demijgrent loco 

* Jacet ubi | steterat quislque atque ordi[nem obtinet 
a Hoc ubi Amphiltruo herus conjspicatus [ est meus 

* Illico equijtes jubet | dextera in|vadere 

* Equites ciSti parent | ab dexteira maximo.* 

In the Second Act of the same play, Scene 1. ho 
lias the following lines : 

* Age i tu | secundum | sequor sublsequor te 

* Scelestis|simuin te arlbitror nam | quamobreni 

* Quia id quod | neque est neque | fuit neque j futurum est 

* Mihi prsejdicas ecjeere jam tujatim 

* Facis ut tujis nulla alpud te sit | fides 

* Quid est quoimodo jam | quidem hercle ego | tibi istam 
4 Scelestam | scelus linlguam abscindam | tuus sum 

* Froinde ut | comraodum est | et lubet | quidque facias 111 

* Tamen quin | loquar haec u|ti facta j sunt hie 

* Nunquam ullo | modo me | potes dejterrere 

* Scelestisjsime audes | mihi praejdicare id 

« Domi te es t se nunc qui hie | ades velra dico B .' 

m Bentley scans this verse tnus : 

Proinde ut comlmodum est ut | lubet quidjque facias; 

which necessarily requires a Licence, to convert ' Proinde' into 
a dissyllable, for which there is no real cause, as the line, when 
properly scanned, as it is in the text, needs no such assistance ; 
for, in Paeonic or Bacchiac metre, the Cretic and Bacchius 
frequently occur in the same line. 

n Plauti Amphitruo, Act II. Sc. I, and Bentley's ' Emen- 

* clationes ad Ciceronis Tusculanas,' inserted at the end of 

* Ciceronis Tusculanarum Disputationum Libri V. ex recen- 

* sione Joannis Davisii, Coll. Regin. Cantab. Socii, 8vo. Can- 
4 tab. 1709 { p. 49, in which last place will be found eleven more 


And these are followed by several more of the 
like kind. The same author, Plautus, has, in 
the Second Scene of the First Act of his Comedy^ 
called Asinaria> used the following verses i 

* Siccine hoc | fit foras [ sedibus ] me ejici 

{ Promeren|ti optume hoc cine pretii ] redditur 

* Bene meren|ti mala es | male meren^ti bona es 
' At malo j cum tuo | nam jam ex hoc | loco 

* Ibo ego ad ( tres viros | vestraque ibi | nomina 

* Faxo erunt | capitis te I perdam ego et | filiam 
1 Perlecebrae | pernicies J adolescen!tum exitium 

c Nam mare haud | est mare vos | mare acerjrimum 
1 Nam in mari | repperi hie | elavi | bonis 

* Ingrata atlque irrita eslse omnia in|te!ligo 

< Quae dedi et | quod benefe[ci ac posthac | tibi.* 

In the Prologue to the Amphitruo is the follow* 
ing line, 

i Deorum | regnator j architectus [ omnibus,' 

which those who conceive the line Iambic, and 
yet refuse to admit the Iambus and Trochee in the 
same verse, have found it necessary thus to alter : 

Deum regnator architectus omnibus ; 

and, at the end of the Second Scene of the First 
Act, this line occurs : 

* Cum Alcume^rra uxore ujsurarijaV 

lines from the same Scene, arranged in the same manner, which 
Were here omitted, as those in the text were thought sufficient 
evidence of the fact. 

° In the edition of Plautus, fo. Parma ? 1510, this line stands 

thus ; 

* Ac loquitur cum Alcxeeaa, uxore -asuraria.* 



Terence, in his Comedy of the Andria, Act III, 
Sc. % uses the following' lines : 

* Adhuc Aiichylis qua? adlsolent qusejque oportet. 

* Signa esse ad | salutem om|nia huic es|se video 

* Nunc primum ] fac isthaec | lavet post | deinde 

* Quod jussi e|i dari bijbere et quan|tum imperaviP/ 

And in his Andria, likewise, Act IV. Sc, 1, he has 
these : 

* Tanta vejcordia mjnata cuijquam ut siet 

* Ut malis | gaudeat atlque ex incomjmodis 
4 Alterius | sua ut comjparet com|moda ah*! 

* Idne est veiruni immo id est ge|nus hominum | pessimum in 

* Deneganjdo modo | quis pudor | paulum adest 

* Post ubi | tempus projmissa jam | perfici r 

p Terence, Andria, Act III. Sc. 11. The last verse, as 
given by Bentley, at the end of the edition of the Tusculan 
Disputations, p. 49, before referred to, stands thus : 

4 Quod jussi ei j dari bibejre et quantum imjperavi. 

But this is evidently wrong, because, in this state, it requires a 
Licence, to make ' ei ' a monosyllable, which is totally unneces- 
sary, when it is correctly scanned, as in the text. 

** Bentley, in his Emendations to the Tusculan Disputations 
of Cicero, edit. 1709, p. 53, scans this verse in the following 
manner, in order to make it a Cretic like the rest : 

Alteri[us sua ut | ccmparet j commoda ah. 

But this is objectionable, because it requires a Licence, to make 
the third syllable of 'Alterius,' contrary to its nature, long;, 
and, again, this Licence is unnecessary, because the Cretic is 
not a distinct species of verse, and the Paeonic, in which it is 
included, admits the Choriambus and Bacchius, of which, with- 
out a Licence, this verse would consist. 

r Bentley, ubi supra, p. 53, chooses to read this verse, as if 
there were an elision of the s at the end of * tempus,' to make 


? Turn coac|ti necesjsario | se aperiunt 

' Et timent | et tamen | res premit | clenegare s 

« Ibi turn eo|rum impudenjtissima o|ratio est K 9 

However different these verses may at first ap- 
pear, from those already produced from the Greek 
Comic writers, it will be found, on due examina- 
tion, by no means impossible or improbable that 
they should both have been derived from the same 
source, and regulated by the same system: for 
the singularity of these consists, not in the intro- 
duction of feet rejected or excluded in the Greek 
examples, but only of the more frequent repetition 
of the two principal feet, the Bacchius and Cretic* 
Like those already given from the Greek Poets, 
they have been, by some persons, thought to be 
Iambic, under the general, though erroneous no- 
tion, that all Comic verse was Iambic. But these 
very persons have been obliged to desert their own 

that foot a Cretic ; but this Licence is unnecessary, because the 
Molossus is unquestionably admissible. 

8 Bentley scans this and the next verse thus ; so as to absorb 
the last syllable of this in the first of the next : 

Et tiraent j et tamen | res premit [ denega- 
Re ibi turn eo|rum impuden|tissima o| ratio est. 

But this Licence is not requisite, because, as the verse now stands 
in the text, l denegare,' the last foot of the first verse, is no 
more than a Di-Trochee, which does not exceed, in value, the 
quantity of the Choriambus, a foot undoubtedly admissible. 

* Terence, Andria, Act IV. Sc. 1. Some of these latter 
verses are mentioned by Micyllus, as having been thought in his 
time Cretic, 


system and principles, by claiming a multitude of 
indulgences, under the name of Poetical Licences, 
the absurdity of which has been completely shown 
in a separate Section. 

The reasons already stated, as to the nature of 
Tragic and Comic verse, both Greek and Latin, 
are, in truth and reality, so very strong in favour 
of concluding them Bacchiac, and so repugnant 
to the idea of their being Iambic, that it is ima- 
gined no person, whose opinion would be entitled 
to attention, can sincerely entertain any doubt on 
the subject ; and, on an adequate examination of 
the lines here given, they will be found perpe- 
tually to produce the Bacchiac, Cretic, and Pseonic 
feet, of which that species is known to consist. 
In some the Bacchius wholly is found ; in some 
the Cretic wholly ; in some these two feet are se- 
parately intermixed with other feet in the same 
line ; and, in some instances, they both occur in 
the same verse, which, on the general principles of 
versification, they may reasonably do, because 
they are both of the same value in time, being 
merely transpositions of each other. Indeed, the 
correspondence between these verses and the laws 
of Bacchiac, is so clear, that Bentley u has ex- 
pressly said of the lines from Terence, Andria, 

u In his ' Emendationes ad Ciceronis Tusculanas,' inserted 
at the end of ' Ciceronis Tusculanarum Disputationum Libri V. 
i ex recensione Joannis Davisii, Coll. Regin. Cantab. Socii, 

* 8vo. Cantab. 1709,' p. 49. 


Act II. Sc. 3, beginning c Adtmc Arehylis,' &c. 
and those from Piautus's Amphitruo, Act II. Sc. 1, 
beginning c Age i tu,' Sec. that they are Bacchiac. 
Those from Terence, Andria, Act IV. Sc. 1, be- 
ginning c Tanta vecordia,' &c. he has in like man- 
ner pronounced to be Cretic ; but, not being suf- 
ficiently aware, that they were not distinct sorts, 
but one and the same, he has, to avoid the admis- 
sion of the . Bacchius and Cretic into the same 
verse, imagined Licences employed, which are 
wholly unnecessary, and do not really exist x . 

From every reason of propriety and experience, 
ground abundantly strong is afforded for believing 
that this will ultimately prove the correct idea, not 
only as to the present verses, but as to all the 
others, employed by the Latin Comic writers. 
However, that the question may not be said to be 
prejudged, without due examination, it shall, in 
the course of some of the ensuing Sections, under- 
go an ample and extensive, as well as a minute 
and particular, investigation ?. 

x See these before pointed out in the notes on the verses 

> See Sections XXVIII. XXIX. and XXX. 

V 2 



Priscian^ his System. 

Prisciaftj when he lived,— Author of the present system.— More 
deference paid to his opinion than it merits.— His artful me- 
thod of avoiding the inquiry whether Comic verse Iambic. 
— Says, incidentally, that Comic writers used Iambic, and 
introduced into it five feet, which he names. — Says Iambic 
verses are either Monometers, &c. — Comic writers, he says, 
used principally Trimeters and Tetrameters, the rest seldom. 
■ — They also used Trochaic Tetrameter catalectic. — All Co- 
mic writers use, he says, frequent Licences — But Terence 
more than all. — Terence, he says, used Trochaic Metre, 
mixed and confused with Iambic— Remarks on his sys- 
tem.— No one, who has tried Priscian's system, can make 
it succeed.— To remedy its defects, they have resorted to 
Poetical Licences. — Hare's classification of seventeen sort* 
of Poetical Licences. 

1 riscian, who lived between the years 513 and 
519 of the Christian sera z , at least 649 years after 
Terence, and 694 after Plautus % may be justly 

z Saxius, Onomast. first edit. p. 34, places him between the 
years 513 and 519. Priscian lived in the time of the Emperor 
Anastasiusa Konigii Bibl. p. 664i } on the authority of Vossius, 
4 De Poetis.' 

a Terence died Anno Urbis Romans 615, Konigii Biblio- 
theca, p. 795, which would be 136 years before Christ. Hel- 
vici Chronologia, p. 79. Plautus died Anno Urbis Romans 


considered as the author of the present system, as 
to Latin Comic Metre; since he is the earliest 
writer who treats professedly and completely on 
the subject b . Others have only spoken of it inci- 
dentally, and very briefly, when describing the 
rest of the Metres in Poetry, without laying down 
any system ; but he has written a separate tract, 
professedly on the point, and has descended to 
particulars unnoticed by them. His rules and ob- 
servations seem to have been the principal, and, 
indeed, almost the only foundation of the opinion 
which subsequent grammarians have entertained ; 
and, before a correct idea can be obtained how 
far his authority ought to prevail, the validity of 
each of his assertions must be separately consi* 

More deference than it merits, seems, in this 
adoption of his sentiments, to have been paid to 
Priscian's judgment, if it deserves the name ; for 

570, Konigii Bibliotheca, p. 647, that is to say, 181 before 
Christ. Helvicus, ibid. p. 77. 

b In his tract * De Versions Comicis,' among the Latin 
Grammarians, published by Putschius, col, 1319. Priscian's 
tract ' De Versibus Ccmicis, 5 besides having been published 
with other editions of his works, occurs in Putschius's edition 
of the Latin Grammarians, 1605, col. 1319; but Saxius, in his 
Onpmasticon, vol. ii. p. 20, remarks, that no author has been 
more negligently published by Putschius, than Priscian. All 
the editions of Priscian seem in a most wretched state; for, on 
the present occasion, four were consulted, for the purpose of 
arranging some Greek verses, which he has inserted from Eu- 
polis, but in every one of them the lines were printed as prose, 

v 3 


his mode of stating facts is extremely suspicious. 
Instead of asserting and proving, as he ought to 
have done, for he confesses it had been questioned 
what was really the nature of Comic verse, he as- 
sumes, as an undoubted fact, that it was Iambic ; 
and that it admitted five sorts of feet K And this 
he chooses thus to assume, as an unquestionable 
foundation for what he means to say, at the very 
moment when he distinctly admits it was so far 
from being self-evident, as he states it to be, that 
some persons had contended, that in truth and in 
fact Terence's writings were not in verse, but mere 

In consequence of this artful mode of evading 
the most important part of the inquiry, and as 
if he had proved his point by the strongest evi- 
dence, he expresses his surprise that, as the Comic 
writers used, as he says, such a kind of Iambic, 
as to place, without distinction, five feet, namely 3 
the Iambus, the Tribrachys, the Anapsest, the 
Dactyl, or the Spondee, in all places but the last, 

b His words are these : * Cum non solum Terentius, se4 
c etiam Plautus, Ennius, Aceiusque, et Naevius, atque Pacu- 

* vius, Turpiliusque, et omnes, tarn Tragcediae, quam Comoer 
1 dise veteris Latinse scriptores, eodem metro modo Iambici sint 
6 usi, ut omnibus in locis indifferenter ponerent quinque pedes, 

* id est, lamburn, vel Tribrachum, vel Anapaestum, vel Dae- 
' tylum, vel Spondeum, absque postremo loco, in quo vel lam- 

* bum vel Pyrrhichium omnino posuisse inveniuntur ; miror 
c quosdam vel abnegare esse in Terentii Comoediis metra, vel ea 

* quasi arcana qusedam, et ab omnibus doctis semota, sibi solis 
4 esse cognita, conflrmare.' — Priscian, ' De Versibus Comicis^ 
edit. Putsch, col. 1319. 


in which last they uniformly employed the Iambus 
or Pyrrhichius, any persons should have denied 
that the Comedies of Terence were metre, or 
should have affirmed that the rules of versification 
were different from the practice of the learned, 
and only known to the Poets themselves % 

He next informs his reader, that Iambic verses 
were either Monometers, of two simple feet con- 
joined ; or Dimeters, of four ; or Trimeters, of 
six ; or Tetrameters, of eight ; for that Penta- 
meters, of ten, and Hexameters, of twelve, very 
rarely occurred ; and he says, that the Comic wri- 
ters frequently used Trimeters and Tetrameters, 
but the other sorts seldom, and dispersed in the 
middle of speeches, for the sake of rhythmical 
pronunciation and distinction d . 

Trochaic verses, particularly catalectic Tetra- 
meters, in which one syllable is wanting in the 
end, was, he says, also used by the Comic writers'; 
and into these, as he asserts, they introduced, in 
every place, the same feet as they employed in 
the Iambic, intermixing with them, however, the 

c See this passage from Priscian, edit,. Putsch, col. 1319, 
already given in a former note on this Section. 

d ' Sciendum est igitur, quod Iambici versus yel Monometrf 

* sunt, ex duobus pedibus simplicibus conjunctis ; vel Dimetri, 

* ex quator; vel Trimetri, ex sex; vel Tetrametra, ex octo ; 

* nam Pentametri, ex decern; et Hexametri, ex duodecira, ra- 
4 rissime inveniuntur^. Ergo, Trimetris et Tetrametris frecjuen.*- 

* ter utuntur Comici, aliis vero raro, et in medio dispersis, pro* 

* nunciationis rhythmicse causa et distinctionis.'— -Prisejan, edit* 
Putsch, col 1319, 

v 4 


Trochaic foot. Of these verses, he observes, the 
last syllable but one is in most instances long ; 
but that verses longer than Tetrameters also oc- 
cur. Instances of such, he promises to give in a 
subsequent part, but this promise he has not per^ 
formed e . 

Further on, he remarks that all the Comic 
writers use frequent Synaloephas, Episynalcephas^ 
and rejections of the letter S, in scanning their 
verses ; but that Terence has employed them more 
frequently than they all f . 

And, lastly, in a subsequent part, he observes 
that Terence uses Trochaic metre, intermixed and 
confused with Iambic, which he says he thinks 
was clone, in order to imitate, by the confusion of 

e * Trochaicis etlam utuntur, plerumque Tetrametris cata* 

* lecticis, i. quibus una deest syllaba in fine, in quibus omnes 

* Iambicos ponunt in quocunque loco pedes, commixto tamen 

* metro Trochaico : in eis plerumque invenimus, ante finem 
4 versus, longam. Sunt tamen et ultra, citraque Tetrametro 

* usi Trochaico. Eorum igitur exempla proferam, si prius Me« 
' tris de supra dictis scripta proponam.* 

f s At illud quoque sciendum, quod omnes quidem crebris 
6 Synalcephis, et Episynalcephis, et collisionibus et abjectionibus 

* S. literae, sint usi, scandendo versus suos. Terentius autera 
{ plus omnibus.' Priscian, edit. Putsch, col. 1322. The ab- 
surd notion of the elision of S at the end of a word, may have, 
very probably, arisen from the character used in manuscripts, 
to denote ' us/ which is the letter ' u,' with a sloping line over 
it: * ns' is represented also in a similar manner, by the letter N, 
and a stroke over it. See these marks noticed by Brencman, 
in his ' Historia Pandectarum,' p. 122, as abbreviations used 
in the Florentine manuscript of the Pandect, 


the metre, the want of skill of the characters who 
spoke. He adds, that some of these lines are 
more than Trimeters, and some less ; and that 
some have the last syllable but one short, and 
some long &. 

To the system of Priseian, as stated above* 
there seems every possible kind of objection, from 
example, principle, and Reason ; and the specimens 
already given in Section XX. from the Greek Co-, 
mic authors, have decidedly established two very 
material points, both of which are confirmed by 
every rule of good Sense and Reason, and directly 

8 • Terentius Trochaico mixto, vel confuso cum Iambico, 

* utitur, in sermone personarum, quibus maxime imperitior hie 

* convenit, quern puto ut imitetur hanc confusionem rhythmo- 

* rum facere. Sunt autem Trimetri, ac plus minusque, et ha- 
f bent penultimam in quibusdam longam, et in quibusdam bre° 

* vera, ut in Andria : 

te Adhuc Archyllis quae assolent, quaeque opprtent 
'■' Signa esse ad saluteni, omnia buic esse video, 
" Nunc primum fac istsec ut lavet, post deinde 
<l Quod jussi dari bibere, et quantum imperavi date." 

1 Haec sequitur Dimeter catalecticus, finiendi sermonis causa 
i quem ad Archillida habuit ? 

" Date mox ego hue revertar." 

6 Similiter Plautus, in Truculento, eodem metro usus est, in 
i sermone ancills Astaphii : 

" Ad fores auscultate, atque asservate aedes, 

" Ne quis adventor gravior abeat atque adveniat, 

" Neu qui manus attulerit steriles intro ad nos, 

" Gravidas foras exportet, novi ego bominuin mom/'' 

Priseian, edit, Putsch, col, 1326* 


contradict the sentiments of Priscian h . The first 
of these is, that each Scene should be throughout 
continued in the same kind of verse with which it 

h Wase, in his Senarius, p. 4, says, ' Prisciani de Metro 

* Comico scrinia compilare non placet. Est ille commentarius, 

* non aspernandus, ut erat autor, inter seculi sui eruditos, in 

* omni arte literaria, consentientibus posterum suffrages, facile 
c princeps ; vel, ut ita dicam Grammaticorum Aristoteles. Argu- 
e mentum, tamen, hoc minus pertractare scriptura nobis reliquit, 

* Est ubi lucem exemplorum desideres passim ordinem. Opus 

* ipsum inchoatum, magis quam pro dignitate rei justis nunieris 

* absolutum, censeas ; videtur enim ita docere, ut qui peritos 

* instruat. Hipponax, aut Pindarus, Eupolis, ^Eschylus, So- 

* phocles, Simonides, et Alcmaeon, nmlta peccant in leges lam- 
c bids praefinitas. Testimonia quaedam colligit, ubi Trochseus 

* Iambum ingreditur, aut Spondeus locos ejus pares etiamex- 
c tremum obsidet. Hinc autoritatem impuris Latrase Comoedia3 
i senariis facere voluisse videtur. Sed exempla, quae protulit, 
c ex rarius occurrentibus sunt. Veteres Grascos bipedali Metro 

* versuum intervalla metatos fuisse acute colligit Ruffinus, ex, 
c eo, quod, apud Herodotum, Trimetri nomen extat ; quod et 
1 liquido confirmant Fragmenta, quae ex vetustissimis Comicis 
6 etiamnum supersunt. Haec pedis utriusque indifferentia Latinae 
« Poeseos, non tarn versuum affectio, quam ipsa constitutio est 
' et indoles, alia compositionis lex et ratio modus, ut ita dicam, 
4 Artis Musicae plane diversus. Cujus origin em siquidem ex 
f veteri Graecia arcessere necesse habeamus, ad Dorismum, ut 

* supra dixi, libentius retulerim.' No one, who recollects the fre- 
quent recurrence of critics to the idea of Poetical Licences, 
evidently resorted toj because, without some such aid, those 
persons have found Priscian's system inapplicable, can he- 
sitate one moment to acquiesce, though on mucli surer and 
better grounds, in Wase's opinion as to Priscian's tract; but when 
he objects to Priscian's instances, because they do not occur 
more frequently, he raises a groundless objection ; since all 
these instances are evidently within the very reasonable musicaj 
principle so often referred to* Of this ; however, Wase had rip 


began, both as to constituent feet, and the length 
of the verse ; and the second, that Poetical Li- 
cences, or any deviation, on any pretence what- 
ever, from the rules of Prosoclia, are no more al- 
lowable in that, than in any other species of Poetry; 
into none of which have they been ever supposed 
introduced, but through gross misconception of 
the nature of versification in general, and Greek 
and Latin Prosodia in particular, as has been al- 
ready shown in Sections VIII. and IX. For no 
one instance of inequality of verse, or Poetical 
Licence, occurs among them. 

The reason he assigns for change of metre, on 
account of the rhythmical pronunciation, as he 
calls it, and for distinction, is so far from being a 
sufficient ground, that it is almost, if not quite, 
absolute nonsense ; for what rhythmical pronunci- 
ation can mean, would puzzle any man, who un-. 
derstands the principles of Poetry and Music, and 
who knows the correct signification of words, to 
discover ; and the principle of variety of metre 
itself, has been already shown to be highly irra^ 
tional \ 

The doctrine of Poetical Licences, as being* 
deviations from established rules, framed for the 

notion ; for, on the contrary, he has completely proved his own 
incompetency as a judge on the subject of Metre, by asserting, 
as he does most absurdly, that the laws of Metre were different 
from those of Music, a fact contrary to every species of Reason. 
T See Section XVIIL 


ascertainment and production of excellence,, has 
been already proved in a separate Section k , to be 
contrary to Reason and common Sense., and their 
supposed existence not founded in fact. But it 
was an easier matter for Priscian thus to sacrifice 
the reputation of his author, Terence, whom he 
has represented as the most faulty of all writers 
in this particular, than to suspect he had too 
closely restricted his own system, as to admissible 
feet. Neither had he sufficient sagacity to per- 
ceive that, where the verses required Licences, 
they were most certainly corrupt, or not what he 
had said, Iambic or Trochaic, but of some other 
kind ; and that, where variety of verse occurred, 
the text must have been ill-regulated, and stood 
in need of a fresh division, which a comparison of 
different manuscripts would abundantly have 
shown him. 

The supposition that the verses, which he de- 
scribes as being a mixture of Trochaic and Iambic, 
were introduced to imitate the ignorance of the 
speaker, is the most puerile and groundless that 
can be conceived : for the verses in Terence are 
too few for this purpose, as occurring only in two 
Comedies, one instance in each ; and consisting, 
as specified by Bentley, in the place before referred 
to, and by Hare, in his edition of Terence, of four 
lines in one place, and eight in the other. Had 
their use been what he says, they ought to have 

54 See Section XVIII, 


occurred in every Comedy, and to have composed 
the speeches of all the inferior characters ; bat, 
on the contrary, it is certain that the speeches of 
Syrus, of Geta, and of Davus, the servants, are 
uniformly and universally in the same metre with 
those of the more elegant interlocutors. 

In addition to all these objections, which are 
certainly sufficient to destroy its authority, with 
all reasonable persons of reflection, no one has, 
on experiment, and proceeding on a similar idea, 
as to the subject of versification, been able, in 
point of fact, to make it correspond with the verses 
of Terence and Plautus themselves. The conse- 
quence of this has been, an enormous increase in 
the number of Licences, claimed by every editor 
in succession, which cannot be better estimated 
and ascertained, than by an inspection of Hare's 
edition of Terence, in which three,, sometimes 
four, and sometimes five Licences are said to exist 
in the same line ; and sometimes two on the very 
same word, even though it is no more than a dis- 
syllable in the whole 1 . In his Preface, Hare has 

1 As an instance of this, the following line from Terence's 
Andria, Act I. Sc. 3, is here given, as it stands in Hare's edi- 
tion, p. 13 : 

* Si ilium relinquo emsnrvitae timeo sin opitulor hums minas.' 

Three Licences, as to quantity, and two to avoid elisions, as 
given by Hare, p. 8, occur in the following line, Andria, Act I. 

Scene 1 : 

' Cum Illis qui amabant Chrysidem una aderat frequens/ 



classed the various sorts of Poetical Licences, 
which he claims ; and, thus arranged, he repre- 
sents them (p. lx.), as consisting of nine sorts for 
converting long syllables into short ; and (p. Ixvi.) 
of eight for the contrary purpose m ; but even he 
himself is obliged to confess that some of them 
offend too much against the laws of Prosodia. 
This is not only true, but the indulgences claimed 

Two in each of the two following, p. 17, Andria, Act I. Sc. 5: 

*,Tum patris pudor qui me tarn leni passus est ammo usque 

**Dum in dubio est animus paulo memento hue vel llluc im- 


Three Licences, as to quantity, and two to prevent elisions, in 
this verse, p. 1 9, Andria, Act I. Sc. 5 : 

< Te isti virum do amicum tutorem patrem/ 

m See Bishop Hare's tract, < De Metris Comicis,' prefixed 
to his edition of Terence, p. lxvii. His words are these: 
4 Haec autem ea fere sunt quae de Licentiis dicenda habui, qua- 

* rum quasdam in Prosodise leges et pronuntiandi rationes ni- 

* mium peccare non diffitendum est.' — Rentley, in the Preface 
to his Terence, entitled ' De Metris Terentianis,' p. xviii. in- 
serts, from Aulus Gellius, xviii. 15, the following passage : " Tn 
"* Senariis versihus, animadverterunt Metrici duos primos pedes, 
"item extremes duos, habere posse singulos integras partes 
"orationis, medios haud unquam posse, sed constare eos sem- 
" per ex verbis aut divisis, aut mixtis atque confusis." Of this 
supposed rule, it is sufficient to say, that it is invented to pre- 
vent what is no evil, and to procure no benefit ; but it is the 
height of absurdity, to suppose that the Comic writers were at- 
tentive to such minute particulars, of no use, and yet violated, 
when they pleased, every rule of Prosodia, by the introduction 
of Poetical Licences. 


by him, even far exceed the kinds allowed by 
Priscian, as already stated ; and it is only won- 
derful how any man, who must have known what 
the rules of Prosodia really meant, could ever ad- 
mit, as Bishop Hare has done, so irrational a 



AuiKorify of Manuscripts and ancient Copies not 
to be received in Contradiction to Prosodia* 

Errors of manuscripts described and stated.— Similar defects in 
printed editions.— Not peculiar to the works of Greek au- 
thors.— No manuscript can be of authority, merely as a 
manuscript, or from its age.— But its merit must be deter- 
mined by its observance or neglect of the rules of Grammar 
and Prosodia.. 

It is so much the custom with persons but little 
informed on the subject, to oppose, on the ground 

of its not occurring in. ancient copies or manu- 
scripts, any suggested improvement, correction, 
or new arrangement, in the text of an author, 
however rational in itself, that, in order to pre- 
vent, or at least to anticipate and defeat, any such 
objections on the present occasion, some facts 
shall here be mentioned, tending strongly to show 
the little dependence to be placed on those ancient 
copies, especially where they contradict the rules 
of Grammar and Prosodia. 

Sometimes, both in Greek and Latin manu- 
scripts, the whole is in capitals, .and the letters of 
the different words are so closely placed, that a 
whole line has the appearance of being only one 


single word D . The forms of the characters very 
frequently wholly differ from those of a more mo- 
dern period ; the contractions, also, which are very 
numerous and various, will be found great impe- 
diments, and very difficult to be deciphered ; 

n The Florentine manuscript of the Pandect, supposed writ- 
ten at Constantinople by one or more Greeks in the sixth cen- 
tury, and therefore in the time of Justinian (see Brencmanni 
Historia Pandectarum, 4to. Traject. ad Rhenum, 1722, p. 11), 
is written all as one word, a method usual in other manuscripts. 
(Ibid. p. 104.) The letters are separate, not joined; but the 
words are not more separated than the other letters. (Ibid. 
p. 105.) A specimen of the character in which it is written, is 
given by Brencman, p. 109, and two others in the same page. 

9 If this assertion is doubted, and the reader should think 
the difficulty here magnified, which it is not, he has only to con- 
sult the plates in Astle's Origin and Progress of Writing, which 
contain specimens of the hand-writing of various ages and 
countries. The reason for the use of abbreviations in manu- 
scripts and early printed editions, was to save time, labour, and 
room ; for it is computed that, if the words had been written 
and printed at length, it would have increased a volume one 
third in quantity, which, in some of the large works that 
occur among the earliest specimens of Printing, would have 
been a very heavy expense. Lemoine's Typographical Anti- 
quities, 12mo. Lond. 1797, p. 26. In p. 19 of the same work, 
is a description of the difficulty of reading an old book, which 
is there said to have been so great, that a treatise was written 
on the art of reading a printed book. From some circumstances, 
it should appear that the author was a printer, and therefore his 
authority is of due weight. His assertion as to the publication 
of a treatise to facilitate the reading an old book, is fully justi- 
fied by the titles of the following works ; the two first articles 
of which occur in the Bodleian Catalogue, vol. i. p. S, under 
the article Abbreviatura ; the third, fourth, and fifth, ibid. 
voL ii. p. 39, art. Jus ; and the sixth and seventh in the Cata-= 



and, besides a multitude of literal errors, more 
readily to be detected, others will be discovered 
less capable of removal. Verse will be often 
seen to occur, at some times wrongly divided as 
verse , at others, written as prose c < 5 and fre- 

logue of printed books in the British Museum, fo. vol. i. sub 
art. Jurisprudent — « Modus legendi Abbreviaturas utriusque 

* Juris, Par. 1518, 8vo.— Et Col. Agrip. 1554, 8vo.'— « De 

* Modo legendi Abbreviaturas in utroque Jure, Nurembergae, 

* 1494, 4to. — Et Svo.' — * Et cum titt. seu Rubricus in univer- 

* sum Jus civile, Col. Agr. 1554, 8vo. ? — ' Libeilum dans Modum 

* legendi ut studendi Abbreviaturas in utroque Jure, Nuremb, 
g 1482, fol. — Par. 1493, fol.' The inconvenience of contrac- 
tions and abbreviations seems to have been found so great, that 
the Emperor Justinian forbade them to be used in the Pandect. 
See Brencmanni Historia Pandectarum, p. 117, 120, ,124c 
But in other manuscripts, of later date, they are frequent ; 
and even according to Brencman, p. 120, are sometimes used 
in the Florentine Pandect. 

* If the manuscripts of Horace at all countenance or cor- 
respond with the regulation of the lines of the Odes, as they 
now stand, they are instances in point : so are, also, such ma- 
nuscripts of Terence and Plautus as give a distribution corre- 
spondent to that which has been followed in the printed editions. 
Such of the manuscripts of Terence, consulted on the present 
occasion, as are in verse, are, in many instances, decided proofs 
of the fact, even where they differ, as they do, from each other 
and from the printed editions. 

* The famous Florentine Virgil, written in the year 49S, is 
in prose. See a specimen of it in Astle's Origin and Progress 
of Writing, 2d edit. Lond. 1803, p. 80. See also, in the same 
work, p. 92, a specimen from a Lombard manuscript, in which 
the lines, which are Latin Hexameter verses, and ought to be 
divided thus, are written as prose : 

" Mattheus institute virtutem tramite mores 
" Et bene," Sec. 




quently without a capital letter to distinguish each 
line r ; and in some instances prose may, perhaps, 
be so ambiguously arranged and divided, as to 
make it questionable whether the transcriber did 
not conceive it to be verse s . 

None, indeed, but such as have been long used 
to consulting ancient manuscripts, can have any 
adequate conception of the multitude and variety 


** Immortale nihil niundi con pace tenetur, 

" Non urbes, non regna hominuin, non aurea Roma, 

" Non mare, non tellus," &c. 

In Stobaeus, edit. Gesner, Tiguri, 154*3, p. 208, a passage from 
Philemon, beginning a K\wv, &c. is printed as prose, though 
Gesner acknowledges, in a marginal note, that it is Trochaic 
verse ; and it is accordingly so given, in Le Clerks edition of the 
Fragments of Menander and Philemon, p. 344. 

r Asa proof of this, in printed books, which no doubt were 
originally published from manuscripts, the reader is referred to 
Pindar's Olympia, Ode I. as it stands in Henry Stephens's 
edition 18mo. Erroduni, J624 ; in which he will find there is no 
distinction by capital letters at the beginning of each line. 
Multitudes of other similar instances might be produced. So 
the lines are also given in Stobaeus, edit. Gesner, Tiguri, fo. 
1543, where Poetry occurs. See, as an instance there, p. 32, 
a passage from Eupolis. 

■ In Astle's Origin and Progress of Writing, p. 84, is a spe- 
cimen from a manuscript of the Four Gospels, in Latin, in the 
Harleian Library, No. 1775, which Wanley says was written in 
Italy above eleven hundred years ago ; and which Astle con- 
ceives to have been written about the latter end of the sixth, 
or the early part of the seventh century. In this specimen, 
which contains the beginning of St. Luke's Gospel, the prose 
is so written, that it looks like verses of different lengths— a 
circumstance which might very probably have given rise to the 
erroneous idea of variety of verse in the same composition, 

X % 


of corruptions with which they abound, though 
some of them have been also continued in the 
printed editions, too closely, in that respect, fol- 
lowing the original manuscript. Many passages 
in Athenoeus, that are certainly verse, are, even 
in Casaubon's edition, printed as prose. This is 
the case with a whole Phallic hymn, sung by De- 
metrius Poliorcetes, which occurs, p. 25, with three 
lines from Cratinus, without even a capital letter 
at the beginning, inserted there, p. 29 ; and with 
multitudes of other instances, which might be 
from him pointed out. In the two editions of Plu- 
tarch's Lives, in Greek, printed in folio, at Basle, 
by Froben, in 1533 and 1560, there are several 
instances of the same kind ; and, as a proof, the 
epitaph of Timon of Athens, and Callimachus's 
epigram on him, both of which are unquestion- 
ably verse, and inserted in the life of Mark An- 
thony there, are in both those editions, no doubt 
because they stood thus in the manuscript from 
which they were printed, given as prose T . 

* See edit. 1533, fol. 324-, a. edit. 1560, fo. 692, a. See 
also four lines from Cratinus, so given in Plutarch's Life of Pe- 
ricles. See the Greek edit. 1533, p. 110. In this edition of 
Plutarch, even the proper names are printed with small letters, 
as they are also in Stobasus, edit. Gesner, Tiguri, 154-3. In 
this same edition of Stobaeus, p. 208, a passage from Philemon, 
beginning Q K^m &c. is printed as prose, though Gesner ac- 
knowledges in a marginal note, that it is Trochaic verse; and 
it is accordingly so given in Le Clerc's edition of the Fragments 
of Menander and Philemon, p. 344. In the Basil edition of 
Suidas, printed in folio, by Froben, ,yi 1544, the proper names 


Nor is this error peculiar to the works of Greek 
authors alone, but even those of the Latin gram- 
marians themselves are, in this respect, faulty in 
the extreme. In Rufinus f De Metris Coinicis/ as 
printed in Putschius's edition of the Latin gram- 
marians, col. 2711, six Greek Iambic verses, so 
described, are printed as prose ; and in Diomedes 
' De Oratione et Partibus Orationis,' in the same 
collection, col. 487 and 488, several Latin verses, 
in different places, are also given in prose. Four 
editions of Priscian have been consulted on the 
present occasion, to ascertain how he intended 
that some Greek verses, which he has given from 
Eupolis, should be divided, but in all the four 
they were given as prose, intermixed with the 
Latin K 

are printed with small letters ; and it is so ill pointed as to be 
scarcely intelligible ; besides that, several different articles are 
all printed together as one paragraph. 

u See Priscian, ' De Versibus Comicis,' edit. Putsch, col. 
1330. Nay, further, even in inscriptions on stone, the same 
kind of error is also found. Among the Arundelian Marbles, 
at Oxford, is one with the following inscription, all in capitals, 
arranged into lines, in the following manner, as exhibited in 
Prideaux's Marmora Oxoniensia, edit. 1676, p, 274: 




Varro, who lived about the time of Cicero, 
namely, about 61 or 57 years before our Saviour x , 
speaks, as has been before noticed, of the incor- 
rectness of the manuscripts, even in his time; and 
it is plain, from some of the specimens which Pris- 
cian has given in his tract c De Metris Comicis,' 
especially those from Plautus, that the lines were 
in several cases differently divided at that time 
from the present regulation, and evidently very er- 
roneously y* 

These authentic facts are manifestly sufficient 
to show that no manuscript can be of authority 5 
merely as a manuscript, or on account of its anti- 
quity, but that its merit or demerit must be ine- 
vitably decided by the test of its observance, or 
neglect of the rules of Grammar and Prosodia, 





As far as to the word * torquet,' inclusive, is evidently Hexa- 
meter and Pentameter verse, concluding with two Hexameters. 
The rest is prose, and could not be comprehended in verse. 
Maeret, in the third Hexameter line, is, in the original, spelt 
as here, Maeret, instead of Mceret. 

x See p. 226, above, in a note. 

y See Priscian, ' De Versibus Comicis,' col. 1323, in some 
instances from Plautus, 


the only sure guides for the regulation of every 
system of versification, entitled to any credit, and, 
as such, employed as the only foundation of all 
advanced or contended for in the present In- 

x 4 



Transcribers of Manuscripts, who they were, and 
ivhat their Qualifications, Merits, and Defects. 

Brencman correct in his opinion, as to the necessity of knowing 
the merits and faults of transcribers and correctors.— What 
Brencman has said, though applied by him to the Florentine 
manuscript of the Pandect only, equally applicable to ma- 
nuscripts in general. — The earliest manuscripts of Terence 
and Plautus supposed of the same age with that manuscript 
—Difficulty of reading manuscripts. — Few persons able to 
do it. — The Florentine manuscript described. — Scribes, 
Writers, or Copyists, their different kinds. — Librarii, simple 
copyists. — Notarii, those who used compendious methods of 
writing. — Antiquarii, those who copied ancient characters. 
^-Singularii, short-hand writers, or those who used abbre- 
viations. — Exceptores, notaries who took down in writing 
from dictation what was spoken. — Calcoiatores, Account- 
ants. — Tabularii, copyists of accounts. — Rationarii, keep- 
ers of accounts. — Logistae, the same sort of persons. — Mi- 
niculatores, miniature-painters, or illuminators, who orna- 
mented and decorated the initial letters and other places. 
—Enfranchised slaves formerly betook themselves to this 
employment. — Afterwards, whoever chose to do so, in hopes 
of reward, and for hire. — And at length the Monks. — Co- 
pyists of the Florentine manuscript were, by profession^ 
KaA>uypa<£o<, or such as made the beauty and elegance of the 
writing and character their object. — They were several in 
number, and by birth Greeks. — Merits of these Copyists 
accuracy and fidelity.— Several examples of each. — * Circum- 


* ducere literas,' what the phrase signifies, illustrated from 
Suetonius. — Copyists were themselves correctors. — Faults 
of these Copyists.— Specimens of their unskilfulness and 
ignorance.— Others, of their negligence, or carelessness, and 
folly, which were of several sorts. — Instance of an omis- 
sion in the title * De Minoribus,' from the Florentine Pan- 
dect. — Other examples of their folly and trifling, but more 
ridiculous than dangerous. 

It is a sound and judicious observation of Henry 
Brencman, a civil lawyer of the eighteenth cen- 
tury, an inhabitant of Culembourg z , and Member 
of the Academy at Florence, that the merit, value, 
and importance of a manuscript cannot be duly 
estimated, or correctly ascertained, without a pre- 
vious knowledge what kind of persons were its 
Copyists and Correctors, and what were their man- 
ners, dispositions, excellences, and defects a . From 

z See the dedication to his book, which is dated thence in 
1722. * Culembourg, ou Cuilembourg, petite ville, avec un 

* chateau, et titre de Comtek Elle est sur la rive gauche du 

* Leek dans le Betau qui fait partie de la Gueldre Hollandoise, 
' au nord de Bommel, dont elle est eloignee d'environ trois 
' lieues.' — Moreri, Diet. art. Culembourg. 

a ' Illud vero, in primis, inquirere convenit, quale genus 

* hominum fuerunt his Scribse, sive Librarii ; ut, de ingenio ip- 
1 aotum et erroribus, in exscribendo, instructiores evadamus.' — 

* Henrici Brencmanni, J. C. et Academici Florentini Historia 

* Pandectarum, seu Fatum Exemplaris Florentini,' small 4to. 
Traject. ad Rhenum, 1722, p. 141. — * Inquiramus, igitur, in 
' mores et indolem Librariorum codicis Florentini, hoc est, in 
i virtutes ipsorum, et vitia; ut ex iis, quae aut laudanda in his 

* aut culpanda venient, eo melius judicetur, quid statuendum 
1 sit de scriptura Pandectarum, et quomodo mendi et errores 

* eonvenientissime tollantur.' Brencman, ibid, p, 143.—* Nam 


a comparison of these with each other, a true judg- 
ment of their work can alone be formed ; and the 
method be suggested for most conveniently remov- 
ing their errors and faults. 

What he has thus said, together also with 
such particulars as he has communicated, respect- 
ing the mode of producing and correcting manu- 
scripts and transcripts, suggested, as it was, to 
his mind by his perusal and acquaintance with the 
Florentine manuscript of the Pandect a , to which 
alone he has applied it, is, with the same degree 
of propriety, equally applicable to all manuscripts 
in general, particularly those of an early date, 
The inquiry is, on the present occasion, more 
closely connected with the object of research now 
in pursuit, than may be at first obvious to the 
reader, as the most ancient manuscripts both of 
Terence and Plautus b , now known to be in exist- 

1 ad emendandos libros 5 et Librariorum et Correctorum genium 
' observandum esse censemus.' — Ibid. p. 162. 

a Victorinus, speaking of the manuscript of the Epistles of 
Cicero, in the Medicean Library, says, " Est autem ille vetus- 
" tatis illius, quae vere ita vocari potest, omnique veneratione 
" digna est, cujusmodi sane pauca reperiuntur priscorum homi= 
" num monumenta: — est, inquam, pene vetustatis illius codex, 
" et Florentine Pandectas, et Virgilii Palatinus codex, nee non 
" Terentii liber valde predicatus existit.'' — * P.Victor in Prsefat. 

* ante Scholia in Cic. Epist. ad Famil. Idem autem Politianus 

* Terentio a se collate, qui est in Laurentiana, subscripsit.' — 
Brencman, p. 7. 

b See Pareus's account of a manuscript of Plautus, which 
he consulted in the Palatine Library, already given in a note 
on Section XV, 


ence, are both thought to have been nearly, if not 
quite, equal in age to the Florentine Pandect, which 
is usually referred back to the sixth century d . It 
shall therefore be the business of this and the suc- 
ceeding Section, to state, as briefly as possible, the 
substance of what he has delivered, as well as to the 
Copyists as the Correctors of this particular manu- 
script of the Pandect, so far as it can be appli- 
cable, as almost the whole of it may, to manu- 
scripts in general ; because, from this, the prin- 
ciples of their system may be discovered, and the 
nature of manuscripts, the errors they contain, 
and the difficulties in using them, which few are 
able to surmount, are subjects but little understood 
by most classical scholars in general, either of 
this or other countries e . The attention of such 
persons, confined, as it usually is, to the structure 
of the Greek and Latin languages alone, is seldom 
found to extend itself to subjects of antiquarian 
research. Because the writers of the middle ages 
did not express their thoughts in Latin so elegant 
as that employed by such as lived in the Augustan 

d Brencmanni Historia Pandeclarum, p. 11. 

e To this observation, the late Mr. Tyrwhitt, the editor of 
Chaucer, is a decided and illustrious exception : to him the pub- 
lic are indebted for an edition of Aristotle De Poetica, which 
at once exhibits him as an elegant classical scholar ; and for 
the execution of a far more difficult task, the publication of a 
correct edition of the Canterbury Tales of Chaucer, so excel- 
lent in its kind, that it-merits to be the model for all similar un- 
dertakings, and which, in like manner, has shown him a most 
able, candid, and judicious antiquary and critic. 



age, the obligations which learning certainly has 
to them, have been forgotten ; and these per- 
sons themselves have been treated with contempt 
by incompetent judges of their merits, unable to 
read, in the original manuscript, the character of 
hand- writing in which it was written. 

To the Copyists of the middle ages, and their 
exertions, it is owing, that the productions of the 
classic authors are now in existence ; and, without 
their repeated aid, by frequent transcriptions, no 
editor of a classic author could have had any ma- 
terials for correcting the corruptions which had 
crept into the text, in consequence of the lapse 
of time. No one, ignorant of that species of 
knowledge, it is evident, can be competent to the 
task of consulting an ancient manuscript ; and 
there is great reason to think, that, whenever such 
authorities have been occasionally resorted to, 
abundance of misconceptions have been entertain- 
ed, and mistakes committed. Even, where the 
hand-writing has been intelligible, as in ancient 
Italian manuscripts of Latin authors, a multitude 
of other circumstances are previously to be con- 
sidered, before a correct opinion can be formed as 
to what was intended to stand, and what to be ex- 
punged or rejected, or how the passage was meant 
to be read. But, independently of these, so great 
is the difference of the character itself, in which 
many manuscripts are written, from that which 
has in later times prevailed in the various parts of 


Europe, and so puzzling are the contractions which 
occur in them, to persons not accustomed to the 
inspection of records, and reading the law hands, 
that, at some of the public Record Offices at the 
Tower and elsewhere in this country, a person ap- 
plying to consult a record, and able to read it him- 
self, has been known, by experience, to have been 
considered as an extraordinary phenomenon. Very 
few, merely classical scholars, could perhaps read 
the Greek inscription, in capitals, and all as one 
word, on the pedestal of the column at Rosetta, near 
Alexandria, as published by the Antiquarian Society, 
or the Parian Chronicle, as printed by Prideaux f , 
all in capitals, and apparently like one word ; and 
still fewer ascertain, without help, on consulting 
that manuscript, whether the Alexandrian manu- 
script of the New Testament, in Greek, in the 
Museum, or as published by Dr. Woide, contains, 
or not, the disputed verse in St. John's GospeL 
Nor could many such persons read the contrac- 
tions in Domesday Book, as published from the 
record in the Exchequer, much less could they 
decipher the original manuscript ; and of the 
multitudes of those persons, including classical 
scholars, who may have happened to have seen it 
in the British Museum, how very small a propor- 
tion would be able to read a single line, or per- 
haps a dozen words in succession, in the original 
Magna Charta of King John! These facts, not 

f Prideaux, Marmora Oxoniengia, p. 157. 


intended to convey censure or aggravate the 
charge of negligence, against any set of men, are 
yet necessarily here stated, in order to show the 
existence of an evil, and to point out the occasion, 
and supply the means, for its removal; an object, 
which cannot be better accomplished, than by 
Brencman's observations, founded, as they are, on 
actually existing instances, to which he has re- 

For the better understanding of Brencman's 
remarks, and description of the various errors and 
corrections, which occur in the Florentine ma- 
nuscript, it will be requisite previously to notice, 
as he has done in a separate chapter, that the 
manuscript is written with letters continued, with- 
out any interval, space, or interpunctuation be- 
tween the words & ; and that it contains few abbre- 
viations, and those rarely any where but in the titles 
to the laws and decrees, except that, at the end of 
a verse or line, the Copyist has often placed a small 
stroke over a letter, instead of the letter M or N; 
and two or three times has united diphthongs h . 
Though the letters are so placed as to appear like 
one word, they are yet separate, without any 
junction or connexion with each other, as if they 

« * Scripturam Codicis nostri majusculam eandemque conti- 

* nuam esse, nulla dictionum intervalla, multo minus verba in- 

* terpuncta, nullas item compendiarias notas habere, ex Poli- 
4 tiano, et Budseo jam pridem, adnotatum nobis est.'— Breno 
man, p. 1Q4«. 

h Brencman, p. 118 3 on the authority of Taurellus. 


were insularly set; and many of them are orna- 
mented with a variety of flourishes with the pen. 
The writing therefore, though, as has been said, 
continuous (for it proceeds in regular lines, with- 
out separation or division of any kind between the 
words), is, if we consider the elements of which it 
is composed, not contiguous 1 (for the letters do 
not touch, nor are they connected with each other 
by hair-strokes, &c). 

This circumstance, as to the character in which 
it is written, has been also mentioned by Augus- 
tinus, who has said it was so written, c ut non 
c orationibus solum, sed ne verbis quidem ipsis 

* distincti shit;' or, as Taurellus affirms, 6 absque 
f ulla clausiilarum aut vocum distinctione, sine 
\ aliquo, preeterquam capitum, intervallo.' Eras- 
mus, speaking of the last five books of Livy, says, 
that this was the ancient custom : c Exemplum 

• admirandee vetustatis, prisco more, perpetua 
c literarum serie, ita depictum ut, difncillimum 
£ fuerit verbum a verbo dirimere, — nisi docto ai- 
6 tento, & in hoc ipsum exercitato.' Multitudes 
of ancient manuscripts, both Greek and Latin, 
preserved, even at this day, in the libraries of 

* ' Ad ipsas literas veniamus. Haec autern singula? seorsim, 

* nulla junctura, nullaque connexione, ac velut insulatim posits 
6 sunt ; plerseque etiam, non sine labore, variis ductibus exa- 

* rata?. Proinde scripturam Pandectarum, quarn continuam 

* esse observavimus, si singula elementa consideremus, contigua 
f non est.' Brencman* p. J 05.— Specimens of the character- 
are inserted in Brencman, p. 109„ 


Italy, sufficiently prove this fact. But if in the 
more ancient manuscripts syllables and words are 
conjoined, without any space between, it is still 
more frequently to be found in marbles and mo- 
numents. Of this circumstance Odofredus com- 
plains, when he speaks of that part of the twelve 
tables, which was afterwards added by the De- 
cemviri, ' ut de istis,' says he, ' duabus tabulis 

* aliquid est apud Lateranum Romee, et male sunt 
' scriptae, quia non est ibi punctus, nee § in 
' litera, et nisi revolveritis literas, non possetis 

* aliquid intelligere.' By ' Lateranum Romse,' 
Brencman says he understands the Lateran palace, 
in which also formerly the fragment of the regal 
law, which was thence transferred to the Capitol, 
was kept. Ancient Hebrew and Greek manu- 
scripts have also this continuous mode of writing. 
Distinction came by degrees from art and in- 
dustry. But to this undistinguished mode of 
writing, in Greek manuscripts, has been not in- 
judiciously ascribed the origin of the accents, 
which formerly seem to have answered the purpose 
of distinction k . 

The whole of this manuscript of the Pandect 
consists of two volumes 1 , which, as Brencman 
says, if the copy had been made at the present 

k Brencman, p. 105. 

1 One contains 29 books, the other the remaining 21. Brenc- 
man, p. 93, on the authority of Augustinus. 


day, would, instead of two, have amounted to 
four m . Each page is divided into two columns, 
each of which contains 45 verses n . c Quod si,' 
says Contius, ' ad Justinianeum exemplar descriptse 
6 sunt Pandectee Florentine, hujusmodi brevibus 
( lineis constare debent, quod erit, si per duas co- 
'■ lumnas singula? paginee sint descriptee, quod ad- 
■ hue a nemine, cum quo fuerim, discere contigit.' 
So says Contius, treating of the number of verses 
which Justinian asserts to be in the Pandect. But 
by the ' centum quinquaginta millia versuum/ of 
which Justinian says it consists, Duarenus under- 
stands whole members of speech or periods, and 
contends that that method of numbering verses 
was familiar with the ancients. But other per- 
sons think with Contius^ that not periods or 
sentences, but lines, were meant' 1 . Each verse 

m Brencman, p. 95. 

n Brencman does not appear any where to have noticed how 
many pages or leaves these volumes, separately or together, 
contained ; but, reckoning each column at 45 lines, and each 
page, therefore, at 90 lines, and the total amount of the verses 
at J 50,000, as stated by Justinian himself, there must be about 
1667 pages in the whole. It appears that the leaves are written 
on both sides, as Brencman. p. 99, says, * Erosio autem mera- 

* branae subtilis Tusco exemplari eo pronior fuit, quod folia 
' ©jrwQoypa^a sint, hoc est utrimque Conscripta, et quidem, intra 

* easdem liheas, eosdemque sulcos, aerugine atramenti, ab 

* utraque parte, membranam pari nisu perrodente.' 

° The term Verse did not originally signifiy compositions in 
metre, but merely the different lines in writing. Calepm, in 
his Dictionary, edit. fo. Lugd. 1631, art. Versus, says, « Versus, 




or line, of the Florentine manuscript, contains 
about thirty letters; but this cannot be exactly 
ascertained, because some of the letters are larger 

* us, Carmen Ita dictus a vertendc, quod antequam legitimos- 
& accipiat numeros, modo hoc, modo illo modo vertatur.' Of 
this he gives the following example : c Quintilian. Cicer. tot mil- 

* libus versuum (id est, linearum).' In another part of the 
same article he says, \ Ponitur aliquando Versus, pro eo, quod 
6 vulgo Linea vocant.' And this he proves by the following in- 
stance, Plin. Epist. lib, iv. : ' Nan paginas tantum epistolae, sed 

* etiam versus, syllabasque, numerabo.* — * Melius antiqui dex- 
s tram tantummodo conscribebant, sinistram sive aversam, atque 

* exteriorem observationibus, correctionibusque reservantes. Ita 

* accipimus illud Juvenalis : 

" In tergo necdum finitus Orestes." 

* Inde et Adversaria, ni fallor, dicta/ Brencman, p. 99. Vic- 
torinus, edit. Putsch, col. 2499, says, still more expressly, 

* Versus Herous Hexameter, Epos dicatur. Apud nos autem 

* versus dictus est a versuris, id est, a repetita scriptura, ea ex 
i parte, in quam desinit. Prirais, enim, temporibus, sicut qui- 

* dam asserunt, sic soliti erant scribere, ut, cum a sinistra parte 

* initium facere ccepissent, et duxissent ad dextram, sequentem 

* versum a dextra parte inchoantes, ad sinistram perducerent> 
8 quern morem ferunt custodire adhuc in suis literis Rusticos. 

* Hoc autem genus scripturse dicebant Bustrophen, a bourn 
i versatione, unde adhuc, in arando, ubi desinit sulcus, et unde 
i alter inchoatur, versura proprio vocabulo nuncupatur.' — It is 
probable that one of the last persons who used the mode of 
writing backwards, or from right to left, was Leonardo da VincL 
A manuscript volume, in his hand-writing, in the Italian lan- 
guage, and written backwards, is in His Majesty's Library, at 
Buckingham House, where it was seen some years ago ; and it 
is imagined that the other manuscript volumes, written by the 
same person, which were formerly in the Ambrosian Library 
at Milan, to which it is supposed they have again been restored, 
are also written in the same manner. 


than others, and the writing may be sometimes 
closer, and sometimes wider p. 

These preliminary facts having been thus 
stated by Brencman, he, in a chapter, ' De 
' Librariis,' proceeds to give, among a few others, 
which, as less necessary, have here been omitted, 
the following particulars. 

Of Copyists, Scribes, Transcribers, or Writers, 
under whatever denomination they were compris- 
ed, there are two sorts — Librarii, or mere Copyists, 
simply so called ; and Notarii, or Notaries, so de- 
nominated, because, for the purpose of expedition, 
they made use of notes or abbreviations, to signify 
or express whole words, and other compendious 
methods of writing. Among the Greeks, in like 
manner, Scribes or Copyists were distinguished into 
Kc^AA/7p^(pc/, Fair Copyists, and beautiful Penmen; 
and Tct%vypa(poi, Quick, or expeditious Penmen or 
Writers. The former were so called, on account of 
the elegance with which they wrote, and formed 
ancient characters; for which reason, also, they are 
termed by some * Antiquarii ;' and beauty, of this 
species, was their sole aim and object. The latter 
were denominated from the velocity or celerity with 
which they wrote, and are termed by Galenus, 
^yj[ji£toypoi(poi, or Persons writing in notes, e caro tooy 
6 a-Yj^sioov, a Notis, 9 an appellation which ex- 
actly corresponds with that of Notarii. By Jus- 
tinian they are named ' Singularii, airo roov o-tyyKoov, 

p Brencman, p, 95. 

Y 2 


< a sighs/ or single letters, as using* single and in- 
dividual letters separately, instead of whole words, 
by which those whole words were intended to be 
expressed or denoted. These same persons were, 
as Budseus remarks, also called Y7roypc*(poi, Excep- 
tors, or such as took down, in writing, words from 
dictation, or as they were spoken ; and the verb, 
v7roypa<puv q , he explains by the words of Modesti- 
nus, who terms persons thus employed, c Eos, qui 
' Notis scribunt acta praesidum,' &c. 

The object of this compendious mode of writ- 
ing was dispatch ; that what was dictated, or 
spoken, might be the more speedily committed to 
writing : and its principal employment seems to 
have been in cases of public business, or such 
private concerns as admitted of no longer delay. 
But what was thus taken down, from dictation, in 
short notes, was soon afterwards transcribed in 
words at length, especially in matters of greater 
moment, such as public acts and instruments, 
wills, contracts, &c. This is clearly shown by 
Paulus, lib. ii. Respons. in these words : c Lucius 
4 Titius, miles, Notario suo testamentum, scriben- 
* dum Notis, dictavit, et, antequam litteris per- 
' scriberetur, vita defunctus est. Quaero, an hsec 

^ This word, among other senses, signifies ' prima manm 

* informare, et primis lineis deformare.' Scapula, Lexicon, 
sub art. Tpa^w, edit. Lugd. 1663, col. 324. The same author 
defines T^oy^n thus, among other senses: « Item descriptio 

* prima? manus et delineatio, rudis et crassa adumbratio. Plat/ 
Ibid. col. 324. 


* dictatio valere possit ? ? To the same method and 
practice, what is said by Scsevola, lib. v. Respons, 
seems to refer : ' Si Librarius, in transcribendis 
' stipulationis verbis, errasset.' With the Librarii, 
or simple Copyists, and the Notarii, or writers in 
contractions and abbreviations, Ulpian joins the 
Calcnlatores, accountants, or computers ; or Ta- 
bularii, copyists of accounts, as if they were some 
sort of Copyists ; for these seem to have been em- 
ployed in calculating tables of accounts, or pro- 
portions, that is to say, in computation, and in 
transcribing fair those accounts or proportions 1 ". 
Modestinus says, on another occasion, ' M$s A/- 

* Speeding, [A'$s KcchxxA&Topczg, %g Aia^ytyigug Ksyc^.sv^ 

&c. as if he meant to say, c Rationarios ;' and 
when, a little after, he treats c nspl Koyigdug Tritewg,* 
( De rationibus civit.atis/ Augustinus remarks 
that these are, by the Greeks, called Aoy&V, and 
thence come the terms ' Logiste ' and c Logogra- 

* phi.' Lastly, in Ulpian, under the title ' De 
f operis Libertor.' the following passage occurs : 

* Si forte Librarius, vel Nomenculator, yel Calcu- 

r In this, as they did not use ike Arable numerals, but the 
Greek and Roman capitals, as appears, both from Greek and 
Latin manuscripts themselves, and also from ancient inscrip- 
tions, in each of those languages, on marbles, a peculiar degree 
of science, and an intimate acquaintance with an obscure mode 
of computation, not usually possessed by Copyists in general, 
was evidently requisite. The truth of this observation will be 
manifest on consulting the Parian Chronicle, as given in its 
original state, printed in Gree^ capitals, and all as one word, 
in Prideaux's Marmora Oxon. edit. 1676, p. 157« 

* 3 


6 lator sit ;' but Antonius Nebrissensis thinks, with 
sufficient probability, that, instead of Nomencu- 
lator, Miniculator should be written ; and, for 
this, he cites the authority of older copies. Mi- 
niculator, he explains to signify him who puts in 
with red ink, ' Literas niajusculas/ that is to say;, 
initial or capital letters, into books already written 
with ink s . 

Gains informs us that, originally, the office of 
Copyist was committed to slaves enfranchised: 
6 Duorum/ says he, ' Libertus potest, aliquo casu, 
6 singulis divers as operas uno tempore in solidum 
6 edere ; veluti, si Librarius sit, et alii patrono 
* librorum scribendorum operas edat ; alter vero, 
' peregre cum suis proficiscens, operas custodise 
i domus ei indixerit : nihil enim vetat, dum cus- 
' todit domum, libros scribere : hoc ita Neratius 
'■ libris membranarum scripsit.* The persons thus 
employed seem to have been, and no doubt were, 
such as were the most learned and industrious, as 
Tiro, the enfranchised slave of Cicero, for instance. 
Afterwards, when slavery, and consequently en- 
franchisement, were abolished, men were induced 
to become Copyists for the sake of reward ; and, 
as the office of Copyist was thus rendered clearly 
one of emolument, whoever was able to form let- 
ters, although destitute of all kinds of learning, 
applied to the profession of writing, as a source of 

3 This term clearly points out an Illuminator or ornamenter 
of initial letters. 


gain. Brencman says he does not know whether 
the manuscripts, transcribed by persons so little 
qualified, are not yet far preferable to those by 
some petty schoolmasters, who, puffed up with a 
little borrowed grammatical knowledge, think 
themselves the only wise men ; and, from that cir- 
cumstance, and under pretence of amending, cor- 
rupt passages, which they do not understand f. As 
the expectation of gain was the sole object with 
Copyists, and books of common and daily use were 
more readily sold, such books required to be very 
frequently transcribed ; and no books are, there- 
fore, more vitiated by faults. In later times, even., 
the Monks applied themselves to the transcribing 
of books — an employment far more suitable than 
sewing, spinning, or weaving, to which, for the 
mere purpose of spending their time, they some- 
times had recourse. 

From these facts, it plainly appears that the 
Florentine copy is, like other manuscripts, to be 

* This observation is certainly true, that the attempts made 
by Injudicious or ill-informed critics, have very much tended to 
increase and multiply errors, instead of removing them. It is 
believed, for this reason, that, on a fair examination, the works 
of Plautus will be found to have been less injured, in this man- 
ner, than those of Terence ; because the former author has been 
less, and Terence more, the object of attention and experiment. 
George Merula, in his Preface to the first edition of Plautus, 
which he published at Florence, in 14-72, speaking of the co- 
pies which he used, says, * At septem ultimas' (Comcediee sc.) 
4 ut in eas incidimus, quae simplices et intactae a censonbus fue« 
* rant, quanquam men*losae forent, multo veriores erunt/ 

Y 4 


referred to the Librarii, or Copyists simply so call^ 
ed ; or that kind denominated Kot7&iypoi<poi, or fair 
and beautiful Penmen, from whom, those who in-* 
serted the rubrics in it, and the names of the 
Civil Lawyers, written in red, are scarcely neces-? 
sary to be distinguished. It is certain, says Brenc-. 
man, that not one person, but several, were en- 
gaged in making that copy; and the same practice 
commonly prevailed in other large volumes, as is 
fully shown by a manuscript in the Laurentio-Me^ 
dicean Library, though Brencman confesses him- 
self unable to give a reference to it, In this latter 
manuscript, as he, however, says, the names of 
the Abbot and Monks, who transcribed the several 
parts allotted to them, are distinctly pointed out ; 
and, on the first page of each gathering or sheet, 
is written the name of the Monk who transcrib- 
ed it- 
Many circumstances plainly show that the Co- 
pyists of the Florentine Pandect were Greeks ; 
and hence it is no wonder that mistakes and errors 
should every where occur, which those, whose na- 
tive language had been Latin, would never have 
committed. On this point, Taurellus thus ex- 
presses himself: ' Jnterdum qusedam pauca pro-. 
< fecto •■,.•.•■., errata quodammodo in grammaticis, 
6 externi Librarii inscitia sive negligentia ea fuerit/ 
&c. Some errors savour much of Gothic barba- 
rism, which is not surprising, as the Goths, from 
the tirne of Theodosius, were intermixed with the 
Greeks and Latins, as Augustinus has observed* 


The same circumstance may have happened, as to 
the Lombards, immediately after the death of Jus- 
tinian. And these intermixtures of the barbarians 
at length overthrew the Latin language ; from the 
ruin of which, arose, by degrees, the modern lan- 
guages, Italian, Spanish, and French. 

Some Copyists were indeed so accurate and 
diligent, that in whole tracts or chapters no 
errors in writing occur. If the same hand should 
in other places appear to be more faulty, this very 
circumstance may be considered as a proof of 
their fidelity, because they most accurately trans- 
cribed the faulty places of the original ; and all 
the faults in that do not seem to have been after- 
wards every where corrected by rule. Such errors 
are, however, preferable to the spontaneous cor- 
rections of the Copyists ; but should even the more 
diligent be sometimes found to have been de- 
ceived, something is to be allowed for the circum- 
stance of that continuous writing, and for that 
confusion of phrases and sense necessarily thence 
arising; besides that, on account of their more ela- 
borate formation of the letters, they could pay but 
little regard to the sense. Lastly, it may happen 
that in a work of length, weariness may at times 
overtake the most vigilant ; and indeed at inter*- 
vals greater slips, even of an attentive and diligent 
Copyist, may be found, in which he may at times 
negligently or incautiously omit some passages or 
repeat others. 

Their fidelity and care, moreover, appear from 


other circumstances also. As a proof of this, they 
took especial care to guard against the appearance 
of a defect or the omission of a passage, if at any 
time a part of the parchment remained vacant. 
The title, No. 7, book 2, f Ne quis eurn, qui in 
i jus vocab. ' &c. ends with the page, but so that 
some part of the page remains vacant ; for which 
reason, lest there should appear to be a gap or 
chasm, the Copyist has prudently added thewords^ 
* shv Xh77si? that is to say, c nihil deficit,' or no^ 
thing is wanting \ One single line was vacant at 
the bottom of the column, after title 1, book 12, 
s De reb. credit.? ;' and even this was afterwards 
filled up with some parallel lines. Again, at the 
end of book 43% with which the Copyist seems to 
have completed his task or portion, the whole of 
the rest of the leaf was cut off. 

Where any thing* is really wanting, a space is 
designedly left, which might be conceived equal to 
the deficiency. Brencinan says, he knows not by 

a The Pandect is also called « The Digest/ and contains 
fifty books, into which it is divided. It contains the answers of 
ancient lawyers to law questions put to them for their opinions, 
and will be found referred to in the notes on this Section, by 
the appellation of ' The Digest.' It is inserted into the ' Corpus 
6 Juris Civilis, 5 by Gothofred. The place where this first pas- 
sage occurs is, Digest, lib. 2, tit. 7. Corpus Juris Civilis, a 
Gothofredo, 4to. 1619, col. 47. 

x This note being written in Greek, is one strong proof of 
what Brencman has said, that the Copyists were Greeks. 

y Digest, lib. 12, tit. 1. Gothofred. It begins col. 352, and 
ends col. 363. 

1 Lib. 43 ends Digest, Gothofred, col. 1604, 


what accident it happened, that book 48, tit. 20 a 
and 22 ' , at the end of the title of each, several 
chapters seem to have been wanting in the ori- 
ginal. Certainly they are wanting in this Floren-t 
tine copy ; for instance, after the title, c De bonis 
6 damnator. V part of the column, and the whole 
of the following page, is left to be filled with 
writing. In like manner, after the title, ' De 
c interdict, et releg. (1 ' there is a space of about two 
columns ; for two thirds of one are left, with the 
whole of the other, and a third part of the first 
column on the back of the leaf. In truth, in both 
places, it is certain that about as many chapters 
as would fill the spaces are wanting, which ap- 
pears, as Brencman says, c ex collatione^cr^A/^a;]/^ 
from which Cujacius and Contius have supplied 
them. After each title some annotations are 

a Digest, Gothofred, col. 1876. It is observable that, in 
the column here referred to, there is an appearance like what 
Brencman here mentions, for some of the laws are put in with 
the Italic character, as if they had been supplied from another 
manuscript : besides that, at the top of col. 1877, is a law, 
which appears to have no beginning. 

b Digest, Gothofred, col. 1880. There is a similar addition 
here of some laws in Italic, as if they also had been inserted 
from another manuscript. 

c Lib. 48, tit. 20. Digest, Gothofred, coL 1874, and 1876 ? 
See note a above. 

d Digest, lib. 48, tit. 22. Gothofr. col. 1880* 

e By this very pedantic expression, which has only tended 
%o make the passage doubtful, it is supposed he means * from a 
i collation of the manuscripts in the possession of the King of 
' France/ See Brencman, p. 288. 


written, denoting, no doubt, the defect, which 
through age are no longer legible. But no where 
else, says Brencman, was there a sufficient space 
left for the introduction or insertion of so much as 
even one law. 

In 1. 1, Sect. 2, * De usufr. adcresc, 6 / * n the 
words, ( sed ad solum socium pertinere debere, 
' quasi solum conjunctum/ the Copyist could not 
read the syllable ( qua/ in ' quasi/ in the original, 
because perhaps a blot, or some other accident, 
had obscured the writing. He therefore left a 
vacant space, calculated to receive those three 
letters, and wrote ' deb ere si solum/ &c. and 
the addition was afterwards made by a corrector 
of that time. Another chasm of that kind was 
immediately at the beginning of the work, 1, 3, 
' De just, et jure f , in these words: ' homini in- 
J sidiari nefas esse/ where the Copyist only wrote 
* homine fas esse ;' and from the ordinary 

hand of some one who read the passage, were the 
words that were wanting supplied. But because 
more space was left than was requisite, three re- 
dundant letters were purposely introduced; and 
those very letters were immediately expunged', in 

e Digest, lib. 7, tit. 2. Gothofred, col. 218 F 

f Digest, lib. 1, tit. 1. Gothofr. col. 2. 

s That is to say, marked with a point, to show they were to 
be omitted. { Denique expungere est delere, quod olim puncta 
4 pro lituris essent, ne codices deformarentur, quodque puncto 
4 literee subjecto, aut superposito, ilia ejiceretur, et expungere- 
* tur, hoc est, extra ceterarum ordinem pungeretur, exturbare- 
' tur/— Brencman, p. 135. 


order that no chasm or blank might remain. For 
after the word ' homine,' is inserted ' hoinscidi- 

* arine:' under c ho/ which is redundant, is drawn 
a line, and under ' C ' is put a point for its omis- 
sion; besides, but that was long after, the E, in 
the word homine, was changed into I. More 
instances of this kind, Brencman says, he does 
not remember to have observed. 

The first page of each gathering or sheet h , was 
at the bottom, marked with Roman numerals^ 
according to the order of succession of each. But 
1. 1, sect. 5, 'De adquir. v. amitt. poss.',' after the 
words ' et quidem,' a new sheet or gathering 
begins; on the lower margin of which was by 
mistake written lxxxiiii. instead of lxxiiii, one 
of the numbers ten k being redundant. In order to 
correct this error, the following admonition is 
placed at the top of the page, ( tovto to ttsvtoSiov oct* 

* cgiv xoii <rc67r(>wg ^cvktcuS c L e. hie quinternio 

h The gatherings, or sheets, consist sometimes of ten leaves, 
sometimes of eight, sometimes of four, and sometimes of six,. 
Brencman, p. 94 ; but it is probable they are always double 
leaves, in order that they might be sewed through the fold. 

1 Digest, lib. 29, tit. 2. Gothofr. col. 971. From the care- 
less mode of reference in Brencmans book, where the single let- 
ter 1. sometimes stands for * liber,' and sometimes for * lex,' it is 
frequently very difficult to discover which he means. The pas- 
sages may, however, be found, by turning to the pages in Go- 
thofred, as here referred to in the notes ; and it is therefore of 
less importance, if any error, in mistaking one for the other, 
|ms been committed. 

k That is' to say, one of the letters X. 

J This note, as being in Greek, together with one similar, 



6 Lxxini. est et male assutus fuit m .' And after- 
wards, for the sake of greater caution, the ten a in 

before noticed, forms a strong reason for supposing that the 
Copyists were Greeks. 

m It cannot be understood how the three Roman letters, 
OCT, can in any way be made to signify lxxiiii. ; and Brenc- 
man, therefore, seems to have misunderstood the correction. 
The gatherings, or sheets, it appears, vary in quantity, some 
containing ten leaves, others eight, others four, and others six. 
Now these, it may reasonably be supposed, were not single, 
but double leaves, for the greater convenience of sewing them 
through the fold. If so, the gathering containing ten leaves, 
had, in fact, twenty; that with eight, sixteen; that with four, 
eight ; and that of six, twelve. By the term f quinternio,' 
' 5TEVTa3Wv,' it should appear, that the gathering in question had 
five leaves, that is to say, for the reason above assigned, ten ; 
and, supposing five of the preceding gatherings had each five 
leaves, that is to say, ten ; and each of the other three gatherings 
four, that is to say, eight ; but that one of those three had lost 
a leaf, which might probably have been cancelled, on account 
of some mistake, or because the Copyist had written rather 
closer, and gotten in the quantity in a less portion, by one leaf, 
than had been allowed for it, the first leaf of sheet eight would 
be number 74 ; so that OCT, even if correctly given by Brenc- 
man, might be corrupt Greek characters, intended for o*toj, 
Octo, Eight, as being the eighth gathering. In this case, the 
Greek passage ought surely to be thus translated : ' This ga- 
* thering is number eight, and was erroneously sewed in.' In 
numbering a sheet, in printing, the usual method, at present, 
is, to mark the first Jeaf of the first half with the letter by which 
the sheet is distinguished, and the subsequent leaves of that first 
half with that letter and the numbers 2, 3, 4, &c. as thus : 
B, B 2, B 3, B 4, &c. See the different sheets of the present book. 
Sometimes the letter and its proper number have also been con- 
tinued on the first leaf beyond the half, as B 5, for instance, in 
the case of an octavo sheet ; the reason for which has been to 
show that there was no chasm, nor were any leaves wanting, in 
the middle of the sheet, but that the sheet contained, in the 
whole, but eight leaves. n Or third X. 


lxxxixxi was erased. Some particulars of a similar 
nature, at the beginning of the following sheet or 
gathering, seem to have been pointed out by an- 
notations ; because that gathering, when the 
former had been erroneously removed and placed 
among the subsequent ones, bore the number 
lxxiii instead of lxxv. But the redundant part 
being erased, the occasion for the note ceased; 
and the note itself was therefore also removed. 

In the very course of their writing, the dili- 
gence of the Copyists proportionably increased, for 
the purpose of rendering the writing more intel- 
ligible ; so that at length the number of each book 
and title began to be placed in the rubrics with 
the same red colour; the inscriptions over each 
law to be more distinguished, and the interpunctu- 
ations also ; the distances or spaces between, and 
the separation marks of the periods to be more 
frequently introduced. In some instances also 
they began to leave spaces after each law; so, in 
book 48 of the Pandect, under the title, ' De 
'■ captiv. et postlim. rev.' after 1. 3° and 1. 9? 9 the 
space of a whole verse is left. Again, after L 25 q , 
under the same title, two versicles are vacant. 
But this, as less necessary and too troublesome, 
was afterwards neglected. 

At the bottom of a page the last word 
frequently finishes imperfectly, part of it being 

• Digest, lib. 49, tit. 15. Gothofred, col. 1904-. 

* Ibid. col. 1905. « Ibid. col. 1909. 


written underneath, which, in other cases, k 
accustomed to be carried over to the next page. 
Thus, in 1. 1, sect. 5, < De adquir. v. amitt. poss. / 
it will be seen that the words, ( et quidem,' finish 
the page in this manner : 

c et qui 

6 dem 
but the syllable written underneath is not repeated 
on the next page, as is now the custom with the 
most accurate. Suetonius points out this prac- 
tice by the verb c circumducere,' where he speaks 
of Augustus thus : " Notavi et in chirograph© 
" ejus ilia prsecipue non dividere verba, neque, 
" ab extrema parte versuum, abundantes literas 
" in altefum transfert, sed ibidem statim subjicit 
" eircumducitque " 

In the progress of writing, they corrected 
themselves as often as they discovered they had 
erred ; and this, indeed, occasionally with consi- 
derable labour and great circuity ; for, sometimes, 
for the sake of correcting one word, they repeated 
several : even in the faults themselves, their great 
fidelity appears, since, in the erroneous repetition 
of the same words, the same faults are constantly 
repeated, so faithfully did they represent their 
prototype or original. From this circumstance it 
however follows, as a just consequence, that not 
all the errors and faults of the Florentine manu* 

Digest, lib. 29, tit, 2, Gothofred, col. 971. 


script are to be imputed to the Copyists, but that 
some of them existed before in the original. 

These Copyists, however faithful, yet being, as 
they were, men uninformed and simple, induced 
to write by the hope of gain, had, like other 
Copyists, their faults, their errors, and their fol- 
lies ; besides that they were writing in a language 
not their own. And that this fact may the more 
distinctly appear, it will be necessary to distribute 
their faults into three classes^ attributing them to 
unskilfulness^ negligence, and folly. 

How great was the ignorance of the Latin lan- 
guage, under which they laboured, appears, in the 
first place, from the Index of the Titles, prefixed 
to the Pandect, where, in numberless places, they 
have written f libro/ instead of ' liber,' probably 
because they found e lib.' as an abbreviation, in 
some other similar Index ; for it by no means ap- 
pears that this and the following Index were the 
productions of Tribonianus, or any other framer 
of the Pandects. Of this species, is the following : 

* Explicit libro tertius' — also c Explicit ex ordine 
' Digestorum libro nonus' — ■ De judiciis libro 
' quintus ' — c Incipit ex ordine libro decimus '— 
' De judiciis libro sextus.' And after book 26% 
are the words ( singulis liber Septimus ' — and ' sin- 

* gulis liber octavus,' instead of c singularium.* 
Besides this, the first Constitution of those which in 

3 There seems here to be a mistake, and that it should be 
book 6, instead of 26. 


like manner precede the Pandect, is separated from 
the Institute by the word 'FELICITER.' This 
the Copyist did not understand, and he, therefore, 
presently erroneously introduced 'LEGE/ as it now 
is— < LEGE FELICITER; Had he chosen to have 
supplied any thing*, he should have written the word 
( EXPLICIT/ as may be seen from the end of seve- 
ral books in the Pandect. But it is plain that they 
did not even understand the word ' EXPLICIT;* 
since, in that Index already spoken of, they have 
supplied f UR,' and have made it every where 6 EX- 
' PLICITUR ;' the more absurdly, because, in the 
same Index, the whole phrase, < EXPLICITUS 
* EST,' very frequently occurs. Those parts which 
are prefixed to the Pandect, at least the Constitu- 
tions, seem, indeed, to be of an age somewhat 
more recent ; but of the same sort or kind were 
the men who made these Indexes. 

Another great instance of ignorance is observ- 
able in the double names of the lawyers, before 
some of the chapters, as well elsewhere, as in the 
subject or head, Q De legatis ;' so it is also 1. 106, 
6 De legat. 1 V which is inscribed with the name of 
Alfenus Varus. The name of ' ALFENUS/ alone, 
is here written with red ink, and great letters ; 
and e varus,' with the common mode of writing, 
and as if it was part of what followed. This was 
in itself more absurdly done, because they began 
to write from the second name, having left, ac- 

* Digest, lib. SO. Gothof. col. 1032. 


cording to custom,, a space for the first, to be af- 
terwards filled up with illuminated letters. The 
same may be observed, 1. 125, in the same place", 
as to the words c RUTILIUS maximus.' To say 
the truth, the laws have usually only one name pre- 
fixed : but in the next book, which, in like man- 
ner, treats e De legatis,' the Copyist has corrected 
himself, having either been probably warned of 
his error, or accidentally having discovered it him- 
self. So, in the same place, 1. 52, < TERENTIUS 
6 CLEMENS' are both in red ink x , as are also, 
1. 57, the words < JULIUS MAURICIANUS V 
and, 1. 62, < LICINIUS RUFUS.' 

As they did not sufficiently understand the lan- 
guage, they did not, in reading contiguous writing, 
correctly distinguish ; connecting what ought to 
be separate, and separating what ought to be 
united. And, since a word, erroneously divided, 
could signify nothing, they became somewhat 
bolder, and, conceiving it a manifest error, con- 
verted it into some other word, nearly resembling 
it, by adding, detracting, or changing one or more 
of the letters. The more modest, without any un- 
faithful intention, often, through mistake, copied 
one word for another, thinking they read, in their 
original, what was not in it, while that which arose 

u Digest, lib. 30. Gothofr. col. 1038. 

x Digest, lib. 31. Gothofr. col. 1046. 

* Digest, lib. SI. Gothofr. col. 1047. 

a Digest, lib. 3L Gothofr. col. 1048. 

Z 2 


from their own incorrect division, was not Latin, 
This happened, merely because they did not pay any 
attention to the sense ; for they only considered, 
whether the word, separately by itself, conld have 
any meaning. An example of this kind exists, 1. \ 9 
sect. 32 z , c Depositi/ Without doubt, it was writ- 
ten in the original a as it ought to stand, c quern 
c dominum ejus putasti cum non esset ;' but the 
Copyist, by inserting only an aspirate, which, in 
other cases, is often wanting or redundant, framed 
the following, c quern dominum ejus puta Stichum 
6 non esset b ;' and thus in many other places. 
From these sprang also rank errors, such as, un- 
der the title « Ad S. C. Turpill V where is found 
' inter pupilli anum,' for c in Turpillianum.' 

Circumstances like these, are not to be attri- 
buted wholly to the unskilfulness of Copyists. Some 
of them are owing to their negligence or careless- 
ness, to their more laborious formation and deline- 
ation of the characters, and to their too great wish 

z Digest, lib. 16, tit. 3. Gothofr. col. 4-86. 

a The reader is not to imagine that Brencman means that, 
in the original manuscript, the words stand separate, as they 
are here necessarily given. The fact is, that here, and through- 
out the whole manuscript, each line resembles a single word ; 
but he intends to say, that the above are the words which the 
manuscript contains, though, according to the method there pur- 
sued, there is no space or other distinction to separate each. 

b These words are also, of course, written, in the original 
manuscript, without any distinction between the words ; and 
this observation applies, by way of caution, to every extract 
here inserted from the manuscript. 

c Digest, lib. 48, tit. 16. Gothofr. col. 1848, 


to adorn their writing ; which object, either from 
their own disposition, or the greediness of gain, 
they pursued to a degree of folly, and thus they 
expended all their industry in the mere formation 
of the letters. To carelessness, therefore, and 
the distraction of their attention, by their too 
great care in writing, are to be especially referred 
anticipations or inadvertent repetitions, or entire 
omissions, and all errors committed on any very 
trivial ground, whatever it might have been, and 
sometimes not till long after discovered, as well as 
the subsequent relapse into any former error. 

As to the transposition, or misplacing of let- 
ters, and sometimes of syllables also, Augustinus 
observes, c Florentinarum Pandectarum ssepe in 
( ejusmodi genere errorum incidisse ;' and this, he 
remarks, occurs on occasion of the Ulpian law. 
' Si Homeri,' says he, ' corpus sit iegatum, quan- 
' tsecumque rhapsodise inveniantur, debentur ;' 
where, instead of c rhapsodise,' the Florentine ma- 
nuscript reads i pars hodie.' But this fact Augus- 
tinus further illustrates, by the following examples 
also : ' subpertus/ for 6 subreptus ;' ' iurnse,' for 
' ruinse ;' c domus/ for c modus ;' ' subsceptam,' 
for ' suspectam ;' ' nepotum quantibus,' for ' quan- 
' turn nepotibus ;' c damnatum,' for ' mandatum.' 

In the inscriptions of titles and laws, they 
seem to have sometimes immediately written the 
rubrics, or single names of the lawyers, employ- 
ing, in like manner, red ink to each ; yet, at 
other times, which often happens, they are found 

z 3 


to have put in several at once, and that at a dis- 
tant period ; but from thus postponing them, it 
sometimes happens that they forgot to supply 
them. It was manifestly extremely inconvenient, 
so often to change ink for red colour ; they, there- 
fore, wrote with ink several pages in a continued 
succession, and without intermission, leaving 
spaces, in which the rubrics and names of lawyers 
might be afterwards inserted. This fact is plain 
from the inscriptions of the laws ; for if, in leav- 
ing a space, the Copyist had miscalculated, the 
names of the authors were either contracted, a 
smaller character of writing used, or even, if ne- 
cessary, a monogram was employed ; or they were 
extended with letters, set at a distance, which, 
besides, often end with a capital S, to fill up the 
remaining superfluous space. Hence it happens, 
that, in the second and third pages of the Floren- 
tine manuscript, all the inscriptions are in black ; 
and, together with them, even this rubric also, 
c De origine juris et omnium magistratuum et suc- 
6 cessione prudentum d ,' which were at length sup- 
plied, without doubt, long after. It is supposed 
that, through the very great length of 1. 2, under 
that title, the Copyist afterwards forgot to write it 
with red. Other instances of names thus omitted 
occur in the inscriptions. And to these may be 
added their thoughtlessness and levity, in begin- 
ning passages as fresh laws, for the very slightest 

d Digest, lib. 1, tit. 2. Gothofr. col. 4. 


or no reason ; as, on the other hand, they erro- 
neously conjoined others that were distinct and 
separate. Similar errors are also observable, as 
to the rubrics of the titles themselves. Again, in 
other places, the names of the lawyers, in several 
inscriptions, are badly written, as one continued 
word e ; besides other errors and faults of the Co- 
pyists in these parts f . 

Lastly, they often converted, without due con- 
sideration, a word nearly akin to it, into one, to 
which they were accustomed, and which was in 
more frequent use. In this manner, even a pro- 
per name has been, by the Copyist, confounded 
with an appellative, in 1. 12, ' De offic. prsesid.^' 
when he wrote this inscription to it, ' PROCON- 
' SULIS libro quarto Epistularum,' instead of 
< PROCULUS; having taken it from the tiue, 

e Brencman's words are, ' male contimiata sunt;' which are 
so lax and indefinite, that it is doubtful what he meant. If he 
designed to sa}' that there was no distinction of colour from the 
rest of the text, but that the names of lawyers, in the inscrip- 
tions, were written with black, instead of red, so that they ap- 
peared like a part of the body of the text, he ought to have 
been more explicit. If, on the other hand, he intended to say 
the words ought to have been divided, the objection is not pe- 
culiar to names only, but applies, in an equal degree, to every 
word in the whole manuscript. 

f Brencman speaks of the errors as very numerous, and 
mentions an intention, which he does not, however, appear to 
have ever fulfilled, of writing a tract expressly on the subject 
of the errors in this manuscript. See Brencman, p. 152. 

« Digest, lib. 1, tit. 18. Gothofred, col. 34. 
Z 4 


' De Officio Proconsulis V which had just before 
occurred. They also transformed more unusual 
names into those with which they were more fa- 
miliar, or confounded together those words which 
were nearly similar. 

From the carelessness, let us pass to the folly 
of the Copyists, which was also itself of various 

They were scrupulous in preserving the beauty 
of the writing, especially, because this tended much 
to their profit, in order that they might thus be 
enabled to sell their care, diligence, and accuracy, 
so much the dearer : for this reason, they altoge- 
ther wholly abhorred additions or insertions, either 
placed in the margin, or between the lines, as im- 
mediately striking the eye, and deforming the 
beauty of the book : and so anxiously did they 
avoid all interlineary insertions, that, for the pur- 
pose of correcting even one syllable, they repeated 
a whole line. So 1. 18, sect. 2, ' De manumiss. 
5 vind.y the words of which are, ' Filius, quoque 
c voluntate patris apud patrem manumittere po- 
' terit k ;' in the Florentine manuscript, it stands 
thus : " Filius quoque voluntate patris apud pa- 
f trem manumittere non potest Filius quoque vo- 

h Digest, lib. 1, tit. 16. Gothofred, col. 30. 

1 Digest, lib. 40, tit. % Gothofred, col. 2412. 

k The passage, as it stands in Gothofredus's edition of the 
Pandect, differs a little from this ; for in his edition it is given 
thus : « Nepos ex fiiio voluntate avi, ut filius voluntate patris^ 
4 potest manumittere ' 


a luntate patris apud patrem manumit tere pote- 
<c rit." For the sake of one syllable, these words 
were repeated, that is, that 'potest' might be 
converted into 'f potent/ because, for the purpose 
of expunging" the negative, it was sufficient to have 
inclosed the c non/ with small hooks from above in 
this manner, c Non/ This, indeed, they used to 
do, as to all superfluous words ; and all the above 
repeated words are, in fact, so inclosed. The 
cause of the error will be manifest, from collating 
the preceding Section 1. 

Again, if they had omitted, or inadvertently 
repeated any thing, as soon as they discovered the 
error, they immediately stopped, and returned into 
the right path. For instance, book 10, sect 3, 
' De edendo/ for e non curabit V the Copyist wrote 
' non probabita curabit / as from this ( non/ his 
eye had accidentally turned to that of the preced- 
ing line : the whole passage is, ' Et si non proba- 
' bit aut probantem judex non curabit de se ipso, 
f aut de judice, queri debet 111 .' The error being, 
therefore, detected, he immediately stops at the 
first letter of the word ' aut/ which follows after 
f probabit.' But specimens of correction of the 
following kind are more rare: book 17, sect. 4, at 
the Julian law ' De adult. n / instead of c suffice- 
f reque procuratoris denunciationem/ the Copyist 
wrote c sufficereque procuratorem is denunciation 

1 Digest, lib. 2, tit. 13. Gothofr, col. 61. 
m Digest, lib. 2, tit. 13. Gothofr. col. 61. 
f Digest, lib. 48, tit. 5. Gothofr, col. 1818. 


* nem,' confounding the termination, on account of 
the following word. 

If they had accidentally omitted several words, 
they even preferred thus repeating them all, and 
writing the same passage twice, or even introdu- 
cing what was wanting in some very foreign place, 
in a subsequent part, to supplying the omission in 
the margin. After L 2, * De jurisd. et imper. ,' 
the Copyist had subjoined that which is, in order, 
the fourth ; but, after the word c possessionem,' 
he stopped, and immediately began the third, add- 
ing over again the rest afterwards. An illustrious 
example of the other mode of proceeding may 
be produced, which, besides the omission of a 
whole law, contains, further, the erroneous repe- 
tition of several words, the erroneous end of one 
law, the erroneous beginning of another ; and, 
lastly, as a note, a line thus — — , instead of N, 
and the monogram, unt. Under the title c De mi- 
c norib-usV law 17 was omitted, which is that of 
Hermoginianus ; and a good part of the following 
law, 18, of Ulpian, had been written by the Co^ 
pyist before he discovered the error ; but, as soon 
as he knew it, he immediately stopped his pen. As 
this is at the beginning of a verse or line, and the 
sense is incomplete, that person has acted very ill, 
who added the final point. After the Copyist had 
added the whole chapter of Hermoginianus, he 

° Digest, lib. 2, tit. 1. Gothofred, col. 39. 
» Digest, lib. 4, tit. 4. Gothofred, col. 128. 


then gave the remainder of Ulpian's words. This 
confusion of misplaced writing they afterwards 
pointed out by numeral letters, BAr, prefixed, as 
appears from the addition of the passage which 
had been omitted in the Florentine manuscript. 

For the following reasons, it is probable that 
these numeral letters, and also the final point, 
were afterwards added by the Correctors ; because, 
in 1. 9, ' De pollicitat.V m another instance of 
the same kind of error, letters of that kind are 
not placed ; and because, besides, these very let- 
ters differ, in a slight degree in form, from the 
rest of the writing. In the middle of the before- 
mentioned 1. 9, all these words were omitted : c ccep- 
* turn est, si bona liberalitate solvendo non fuerint, 
' extraneum heredem in quintam partem patri- 
f monii defuncti, liberos in decimam teneri, divi 
' Severus et Antoninus rescripserunt V When he 
had finished the law, the Copyist at length add- 
ed what he had omitted; but without putting 
any numeral letters for the purpose of right order* 
These the Corrector supplied at the place in the 
margin, having first expunged what the Copyist 
had written, in the improper place. This is, how- 
ever, a single and singular instance, and Brenc- 
man doubts whether, in other examples of trans- 
position, these numbers were placed by the Cor- 
rectors. Under the title ' De manumiss. testam^ 

i Digest, lib. I, tit. 12, col. 1951. 

r Digest, lib. 1, lit. 12. Gothofr. col. 1953. 


there is a remarkable transposition ; so that law 33 s 
immediately follows law 30; then succeed laws 31 
and 32 ; and, afterwards, laws 34, 35, 36, &c. : 
and, for the purpose of restoring order to those four 
chapters, these letters, a, S, 6, y, s, are prefixed. 
It therefore sufficiently appears, that the Copyists 
were desirous that the eyes of the reader should 
not be offended by the corrections and additions. 

From the same fountain, the desire of pre- 
serving the elegance of the writing, flowed other 
follies and absurdities, which yet did not equally 
infect all. Great attention was paid to keeping 
the writing within the prescribed bounds, or 
limits ; and, therefore, in some places, for the sake 
of filling a vacant space, they introduced a letter 
of gigantic magnitude at the end of the verses or 
lines ; or they extended others beyond their pro- 
portion. But, in other places, that they might 
not exceed the bounds, they improperly divided 
even monosyllables and diphthongs, and separated 
them, as far as possible, by placing one part at 
the end of the verse, and the other at the begin- 
ning of the following. Again, at their pleasure, they 
added whole syllables, consisting of several letters 
at the end ; but this is often done in small and 
close characters, lest they should too far extend 
beyond the lines intended to confine them. Doubt- 
less, in other ancient manuscripts also, senseless 
divisions, and the desire to contract or extend the 

s Digest, lib. 40, tit. 4. Gothofr. col, 1419. 


writing, are observable. And even the Hebrews 
extend, in an extraordinary manner, some of their 
final letters, for the sake of filling a space. To 
the principle of contraction, are also to be referred 
monograms, and other compendious modes of 
writing. Lastly, w r here, through oversight, they 
had either begun any passage too far within the 
prescribed bounds for the verses or lines, or left off 
before they came to the end, this blank, or hiatus, 
they filled with letters void of any meaning, either 
repeated, or not relating to the subject, but which 
are found to be continually introduced. Cases also 
occur, where this happens for several verses or lines. 
Other instances of the folly of the Copyists 
are more ridiculous than dangerous. The initial 
letter of each page is frequently large, even 
although it is but part of a word. So in a 
Greek word, in the Constitutions before the Pan- 
dect, after a blank, with which the former page 
concludes, the succeeding page begins with <rsi % 
the first letter written much larger than the rest,. 
This syllable, by itself, means nothing, but is ei- 
ther the termination of some Future Tense, or of a 
Noun. In like manner, under the title c De orig. 
' jur. V one of the pages begins in the middle of 
the particle c nisi ;' and yet it has a great S. 
Again, 1. 36, ' De legib.' the first word of the page 
is e magnae V with an M of extraordinary size. 

* Digest, lib. 1, tit. 2. Gothofr, col. 4. 
u Digest, lib. 1, tit. 3. Gothofr, col. 13. 


In 1. 7, c De in integr. restitut.V in the mar- 
gin a large cross in red is placed, with lilies on the 
top, and other ornaments on the arms. This is 
placed nearly opposite the words ' Divi Antonini/ 
because, perhaps, the Copyist mistook this person^ 
termed ' Divus/ for a saint, in whose honour he 
did this. Again, 1. 26, sect. 7, ' Ex quib. caus* 
* major.' before the words c interventu feriarum y/ 
a cross, more perfect and finished than that just 
mentioned, is placed, as if, without doubt, holy- 
days were the subject mentioned ; as is done in 
almanacks, before the Sundays, and feasts of the 
saints, unless, indeed, this cross may seem to be 
something more recent than the writing z . 

x Digest, lib. 4, tit. I. Gothofr. col. 109. 
y Digest, lib. 4. tit. 6. Gothofr. col. 140. 
z Brencman, p. 139, &c. and the authorities there cited 



Corrections in Manuscripts, how and by whom 

The Florentine manuscript of the Pandect appears to have been 
read over again some time after it was written. — The Correc- 
tors men of the same kind as the Copyists.— In proportion as 
a manuscript more correct, the writing less beautiful. — Faults 
left after correction. — Examples of partial, erroneous, and 
foolish corrections.-- All the corrections notbythe same hand; 
nor all of the same period. — Who appear to have been the 
Correctors of this copy, and on what occasion.- — Age of each 
correction cannot be fixed, especially if it is made on 
another. — Not always corrected by another copy, as appears 
from the fluctuation of some of the corrections, — Correc- 
tions, where the former writing left. — An erroneous cor- 
rection, arising from ignorance of the language and of the 
customs of antiquity. — Correct passages corrupted from 
vicious ones.— Senseless and ridiculous corrections by recent 
Critics. — Marks of correction. — Mark for expunging. — 
Ancient method of writing and expunging. — Point for ex- 
punging in the Florentine Pandect, the same with that used 
by the Hebrews and Greeks. — Mode of expunging several 
words by small hooks or brackets, facing each other. — 
Corrections with a pen or pen-knife. — Letters with a line 
drawn through the writing. — Mark for supplying several 
words, when omitted in the Pandect. — Marks for transpo- 
sition. — Indications for uniting or disjoining. — Numbers used 
for distinction of pages.— Some alphabetical numbers. — 
Points or stops a modern invention.— Origin of the Comma. 
— Single Points. — Other superfluous ones. — Mark of a Para- 


graph.— Meaning, use, and form of the same.-— Marks of 
approving, or censuring, or of distinguishing a passage for 
observation. — Also for pointing out a fault or suspected 
place. — Other marks and marginal notes, especially crosses* 
— Interlineary indications of proper names. 

x>rencman has remarked, that, in the case of ma- 
nuscripts, not only the errors of the first copy re- 
mained, and were continued in the subsequent 
transcripts, but that these were frequently, by 
transcription, increased ' ad infinitum ;' which, 
together with the circumstance of subsequent neg- 
ligent and superficial correction, introducd a la- 
byrinth of error, from which no one could be ex- 
tricated, even with the assistance of Ariadne's 
clue or thread. 

Anciently, the owners of books themselves^ 
and, among these, men conspicuous for their birth 
and rank, amended them, and afterwards, for the 
sake of greater caution, wrote at the beginning a 
memorandum of their having so done. But how 
great negligence afterwards crept into these mat- 
ters, appears, as well from the circumstance itself, 
as from the multitude of dire and horrid impre- 
cations and adjurations, which in many books are 
prefixed against the less diligent Correctors. The 
Florentine manuscript of the Pandect was, at an 
early period, read over and corrected ; although 
this seems to have been at some distance of time 
after it had been written ; for, in the first place 5 
the character used by the Corrector appears 
somewhat different from that originally employed. 


Besides, from the greater part of the additions, it 
appears that the method of interponctuation was 
more distinct than usual ; as if the practice had 
seemed to have increased with the length of time. 
So in the inscriptions, 1. 29 and 30, ' Ex quib. 
' caus. major. a ,' 1. 29, with the final words of 1. 28, 
and part of 1. 30, had been omitted. After the 
name of the lawyer, a point of equal age is ob- 
servable; and, after the completion of the inscrip- 
tion, two points : whereas, in other places, every 
where the inscriptions are continued, without any 
distinction in the context of the writing itself. But 
the Correctors of books were men of the same con- 
dition and disposition as the Copyists themselves ; 
namely, men, discharging their duty in a super- 
ficial manner, and were only intent on this object, 
that the value or price of the book might not be less- 
ened by too great solicitude in correction ; for which 
reason they appear sometimes to have purposely 
abstained from correction, particularly in those in- 
stances which they thought matters of indifference. 
But, in other places, for the same reason, they 
only partially changed the faults, while the rest of 
the correction seems to have been, without effort, 
sufficiently obvious ; as if it had been enough to 
have just pointed out with their finger only, the 
correction and true reading. Besides, through 
unskilfulness also, they have, beyond doubt, com- 
mitted errors, especially in those places where the 

Digest, lib. 4, tit. 6. Gothofr. col. 141. 
A. A 


copy from which they corrected, was faulty ; for, 
among the ancient corrections also, some things 
are for the worse, and are found to be absurdly 
introduced. It is, however, to be remembered, 
that the times when these persons lived, were now 
relapsing very rapidly into barbarism, and a su- 
pine negligence of study and the liberal arts. To 
this must be added the sloth and precipitancy of 
these persons themselves, as their only object ap- 
pears to have been the acquisition of emolument, 
with as little trouble and labour as possible : for, 
in general, it is to be remarked, that, where the 
band-writing is the more beautiful, more errors 
commonly remained ; as if, says Brencman, the 
Corrector, relying on the faith of the good writing 
and apparent diligence of the Copyists, had skip- 
ped over the passage, or, at least, hastily and 
cursorily had read it over b . 

Thus, under the titles ' Mandati c ' — ' De he- 
f red. v. act. vend.' 1 ' — ; De action, emp. et vend. e / 

b Brencman, when lie mentions, as he has done, p. 153, 
163, the anxiety of the Correctors to avoid defacing the beauty 
of the writing, has assigned a much more probable cause for 
the fact, which he here notices. Frequent erasures, interlinea- 
tions, or crossings through the words, would have shown, upon 
the face of it, that the manuscript was negligently and care* 
lessly copied; but, without such indications of error, it would 
have been extremely difficult, especially where, as in this case, 
the writing was continued like one word, for any person to de- 
tect singly the several errors. 

c Digest, lib. 17, tit. 1. Gothofr. col. 494. 

d Digest, lib. 18, tit. 4. Gothofr. col. 55.5. 

e Digest, lib, 19, tit. 1. Gothofr, col. 58 i. 


—and also c Locati conducti f ,' and elsewhere, an 
intermission of the usual or ordinary Corrector is 
observable. Whence arises that other paradox, 
that, in proportion as the Copyist was more dili- 
gent and correct, the writing is found to be so 
much less beautiful ; and it is to be remembered 
besides, that the most diligent Copyists have occa- 
sionally slumbered. 

Besides, as the Copyists themselves sometimes 
corrected their errors, while they were writing, it 
is extremely possible and probable that the Cor- 
rector might there also have made a fault, and 
been in the wrong ; presuming, from the instance of 
one or two emendations, that all the errors in that 
part were corrected s. There are instances also, 
where, on account of the too great corruption of 
the intricate writing, he stops at a faulty place, as 
if he were in despair, and gets as well out of it, 
as he can: for instance, 1. 10, sect. 17, ( De gra- 
' dib. et adfin.V many of the doubtful words he 
encloses with hooks, as if tlpey had been redun- 
dant, which he ought not to have done. But this, 
Brencman says, is the only place, in the whole 
Pandect. Lastly, the magnitude of the work it- 
self ought to be recollected, and that it could not, 
without great labour, be read through and cor- 
rected. In short, they were studious to preserve 

f Digest, lib. 19, tit. 2. Gothofr. col. 600. ' 

? The note just inserted, p. 354«, applies to this passage also* 

* Digest, lib, 08. tit. 10. Gothofr. col. 1340. 

\ A 2 

356 AN INQUIRY into 

its beauty, to which their sloth also led them % 
and, on that point, were particularly solicitous 
that their fraud and negligence might not be de- 
tected by the purchaser. This folly in preserving 
the fairness of the writing, in one particular, very 
much contributed towards their gain ; namely, 
that they so slightly expunged what was to be 
taken out, that the former writing may yet be 
clearly seen, 

It would be too prolix to insert specimens of all, 
but some examples shall be here given of correc- 
tion, either wholly neglected, or only partially 
made ; and also of that which is manifestly ab- 
surd. In law 31, 4 De legib.7 there was formerly 
the word ' princeps ; between p and s, w T as writ- 
ten, above, in addition, e ; the former e still re- 
maining untouched : so that it may now be prin- 
cepes. On the contrary, 1. 4, 6 In jus vocati ut 
6 eant ! v &c. where ' libro quinquagintasimo ' had 
been written, the syllable 6 ta ' being expunged, it 
remains c quinquaginsimo,' with i in the last syl- 
lable but one. L. 8, ' De proeuratorib.y instead 
of ' consentiente,' it was • consentinente;' for the 
Copyist meant to write i sentential At an early 
period, only the a was expunged, as if the correc- 
tion cf the rest was sufficiently plain : so, on the 
contrary 5 every where, when, by an opposite error, 

5 Digest, lib. I, tit. 3. Gothofr. col. 12. 

k Digest, lib. 2, tit. 6. Gothofr. col. 47. 
1 Digest, lib. S } tit. 3. Gothofr. col. 91. 


c sentia' is written for ' sentential nothing appears 
supplied ; and, therefore, it is also given by Taurel- 
lus, ' sENtia 1 '.' L. 7, sect, 5, < De pact. 11 ,' it was 
written ' Marcusellus,' for c Marcellus,' the Co- 
pyist correcting himself, who, at first, thought, 
that the common name ' Marcus ' had occurred ; 
but this, also, seemed too manifest to be amended. 
In like manner, the Corrector thought his labour 
was not wanted for what is said, 1. 7, sect. 9, ' De 
f pact, V in the middle of it, where the Copyist 
wrote c dolus malo,' beginning to err from the 
former words c dolus malus.' Again, in the in- 
scription, 1. 65, Q De usufr.p ', ' ad Plautio ' was 
written, instead of c ex Plautio ; for the Copyist 
meant to write ' ad Plautium ;' but, while he was 
writing, discovered the mistake. The Corrector, 
however, thought the error consisted in using the 
sixth case. Other places, also, have remained 

m It is much to be doubted whether writing l sentia,' for * sen- 
* tentia,' is to be considered as an error, and not rather as a 
kind of monogram. Dr. Taylor, in his Elements of the Civil 
Law, p. 20, has remarked, that, in this manuscript of the Pan- 
dect, the letters of two words are often consolidated, when it 
happens that those which compose a part of the latter, are con- 
tained in the former. And, in the present instance, it would 
only be the consolidation of two syllables in the same word * 
for, repeating the three letters, t, e, n, in the word ' sentia,' 
and introducing them between the n and t, would completely 
produce the word sententia. 

n Digest, lib. 2, tit. 14. Gothofr. col. 63. 

° Digest, lib. 2, tit. 14. Gothofr. col. 63. 

9 Digest, lib. 7, tit, I. Gothofr. col 227, 
A A 1 


entirely untouched ; the correction being suffici- 
ently obvious. 

Of improper and false correction, there are 
these examples: 1. 9, f De pact.V in the word <de- 
c bitum,' the b is expunged, and d introduced in 
its place. L. 6, sect. 9^ c De negot. gest.V in the 
words f me possis convenire,' the last s, in c possis/ 
is expunged. L. 37, in the same place s , it w T as 
rightly written c sine tutoris auctoritate ;' but the 
i, in ' auctoritate,' is expunged, and e introduced 
instead ; but here, the Corrector having discovered 
his mistake, immediately expunged the letter 
which he had added. L. 14, sect. 5 l , at the 
end, c Quocl metus can.' the words ' etiamsi ad 
c alium res pervenit,' are thus changed, c ut earn 
6 si ad alium,' &c. Again, 1. 16, sect. 2, in the 
same place n , in ' scelere,' 1 between s and e is 
written between the lines, with no sense, and not 
even with the pronunciation to bear it out. L. 9^ 
sect. 3, c Be do. ma. x ,' were the words 'pares- 
c criptis verbis,' transposed for ( prsescriptis ;' but 
instead of this, it was made 6 perscriptis ;' a and e 
being expunged, and another e placed over a, 
L. 11, in the same placed c non debet dari. Qui* 

i Digest, lib. 2, tit. 14. Gothofr. col. 64. 

r Digest, lib. 3, tit. 5. Gothofr. col. 98. 

s Digest, lib. 3, tit. 5. Gothofr. col. 105* 

* Digest, lib. 4, tit. 2. Gothofr. coh 113. 

u Digest, lib. 4, tit. 2. Gothofr. coh 114. 

x Digest, lib. 4, tit. 3. Gothofr. col. 118. 

¥ Digest, lib. 4, tit. 3. Gothofr, col. 118. 


* busdam personis non dabitur/ after the first period 

* et' was anciently added, and the same written 
upon or refreshed ; that is to say, it was recently 
approved. In the mean time, the former period 
belongs to the antecedent words, which do not 
stand by themselves. -Lastly, 1. 22, * De minorib.Y 
in the words * ad adeundnm hereditatem,' the 
word c ad ' was anciently expunged ; as if the Cor- 
rector at least had read ' ad ad eundem,' the pre- 
position being repeated. 

No one can safely affirm that all these, though 
by no means recent, are the work of an ordinary 
Corrector ; for not only are the corrections of the 
Pandect various, and of an uncertain age, but 
«ven the more ancient themselves are of several 
periods, and not all of the same time. It is 
probable that the owners of the Florentine manu- 
script themselves, using their right over their own 
property, sometimes corrected some things, as 
well in places which either were not at ail, or 
certainly, by an ordinary Corrector, more negli- 
gently revised ; as also in those where they rightly 
and diligently corrected the copy, if at any time 
they were induced, from neighbouring errors or 
cursory emendations, to think it not carefully read 
over. Again, it may be conjectured that they 
had not always at hand other copies to consult ; 
and therefore trusted more, and too much, to 
themselves. Bat the most recent corrections, 

* Digest, lib, 4, tit. 4. Gothofr. col. 12& 
A A 4 



that is to say, those which crept into the manu- 
script at Pisa, were, it is imagined, m a ie by those 
who consulted it. One reason, among others, for 
this supposition, is, that here and there, in the 
same place, they appear made in great number, 
interpunctuations and notes being frequently 
added, which indicate that those places had been 
read by some one with particular care and atten- 
tion ; as if, for instance, in searching for a law or 
case, those persons had fallen upon this or that 
place. As these honest and worthy men, who 
consulted it, seem to have thought that they were 
admitted to the reading of these volumes under 
condition of emendation and improvement, they 
therefore, in return for the benefit, and as an in- 
stance of their gratitude, employed their pains on 
it. But as the times when learning began to re- 
vive were ignorant and particularly rude, so the 
emendations of these persons were very often fri- 
volous, improper, and senseless. Hence arise the 
complaints of Augustinus, Contius, and Norisius, 
on the perverse, violent, foolish, and erroneous cor- 
rections of the later critics; and even correct 
places are found corrupted by the faulty. 

The age of each of the corrections, as well 
ancient as modern, cannot be precisely ascertained* 
But it sometimes happens, that even an ancient 
correction can be scarcely distinguished from one 
of very modern date ; because some words have 
been written upon again with recent ink ; and this 
,yery circumstance seems to have deceived even 


Taurellus himself. Some modern corrections have 
also the appearance of the old character, and by 
that circumstance are concealed under it. But the 
corrections of the middle age, on account of their 
uncertainty as to time, may be sometimes termed 
somewhat more ancient, sometimes somewhat 
more modern, which comes almost to the same 
point ; for, however different they may sound, they 
are yet, notwithstanding, bounded by the same 
common limits of ancient time, on one hand, and 
more recent, on the other, in the same manner as, 
in fact, these formulas differ nothing, ' donee vi- 
6 vain,' as long as I live ; and c donee moriar/ 
until I shall die. Besides the early corrections, 
and those made afterward^ more at leisure, among 
which are also succeeding emendations of several 
parts of the same word, there are various places^ 
manifestly not corrected, and still remaining 
faulty ; and, in the places corrected, such circum- 
stances also are often found, as to render it doubt- 
ful whether the alterations are right or wrong. 
Many passages, inserted by Taurellus, which are 
not in the Florentine Pandect, abundantly show 
this fact ; and so do also those which Taurellus 
has pointed out by marks, as being either super- 
fluous or suspicious, or uncertain places, or con- 
tradictions to the rules of the Latin language, or 
added by some ancient Copyist or Corrector, 
though the sense was complete without ; or con- 
sisting of letters changed, actually doubled, or to 


foe doubled j or probable corrections, or two con^ 
sistent or correspondent readings. 

That the Correctors did not always consult 
other copies in their emendations, the variations in 
the corrections themselves particularly show. L. 2, 

* De offic. praesid.%' instead of the word c prseses/ 
was written ' prsesedes :' some person expunged 
the middle e, and, in its place, substituted i ; but 
when, on reading it, he perceived that the word 
6 potest,' as being of the singular number, could 
not agree with it, he expunged the letter d : on 
the replaced i, or the superfluous e, he however 
made no experiment. L. 8, sect. 4, Q Qui satisd. 

* ccg.V it stood, very rightly, ' de re restituenda 

* domino proprietatis ;' but some one was desirous 
of mending it, and therefore altered the last i into 
e. It is supposed that, not observing the prepo- 
sition, he meant to read ' restituendas domino 
1 proprietates.' Presently, however, having disco- 
vered his mistake, he immediately, while it was 
wet, rubbed out the correction with his finger. A 
later person, thinking, perhaps, that the oblitera- 
tion had happened by chance, or falling into the 
same error, certainly replaced the same e, which 
is there stilL L. 7, sect. 6, c De pact.V there 
was written, in the beginning, ' quod cum est, ex 
s parte agentis/ &c. Between c est ' and ' ex,' an 

a Digest, lib. 1, tit. 18. Gothofr. col. 33. 
b Digest, lib. 2> tit. 8. Gothofr. col. 49. 
c Digest, lib. 2, tit. 14. Gothofr. col. 63. 


old hand wrote, over the line, the word ■ et.' Ano- 
ther, as if he thought that not sufficient to denote 
* etiam,' added the syllables c iam ; ! and thus in- 
terpolations, as if there had been some right of 
sweeping away, like a torrent, gradually increased. 
Taurellus, indeed, has admitted that Q etiam,' but 
inclosed with asterisks. L. 1, sect. 2, c De pos- 
c tul.V it was c responponsitasse,' anciently the 
redundant syllable, ( pon/ was expunged, and 
rightly ; but afterwards the word was altered into 
6 respondisse/ and erroneously. L. 19, sect, the 
last but one, ' De negot. gest.%' instead of ' ex 

* nostra pecunia,' the Copyist had written ' e nos- 

* tra pecunia.' To the preposition e, the x was 
superadded, but presently, as if he had repented 
of the correction, he expunged both the e and x ; 
and the sense also in this place, is complete with- 
out the preposition. Thus it happens very often. 

It has been already noticed, that an ordinary 
-Corrector, from a wish to preserve the fairness of 
the writing, either corrected faults partially, con- 
tenting himself with only pointing out the full 
and complete correction, or -even, as in a matter 
too manifest, had wholly refrained from all cor- 
rection. But it has happened, that a later hand, 
more solicitous, has completed the corrections 
which had been begun, or has wholly supplied 
others, which had been omitted. An instance of 

d Digest, lib. S } tit. 1. Gothofr. col. 77. 
* Digest, lib, 3, tit. 5, Gothofr. col. 101- 



the first is to be found 1. 8, f De procurat. f ;' 1. 7, 
sect. 5 and 9, < De pact.; ■' 1. 65, ' De usufr. V 
and elsewhere. Of those places which were but 
lately corrected, and which continued so long in 
their native error, infinite examples may be pro- 
duced, but they are almost all of less moment. 

It is of greater importance to attend to those 
corrections which were made by several persons at 
different times. L. 1, ' Ne quis eum qui in jus 
' vocat.',' &c. instead of ' eompesceret,' it was 
6 comesseret ;' p was at first added, and the letter 
s was more recently changed for c. L. 7, sect. 2, 
( De pact.V e quilem' was written, instead of 6 civi- 
' lem ;' as if it had been qu-i-lem : more anciently, c 
was placed, and the q expunged ; then i was added 1 . 
L. 1, sect. 3 m , at the end, ' De postul.' instead of 
i contumax plecteretur,' it was c contumaplecte- 
f tur ;' re was rather anciently added, x more re- 
cently. L. 35, e De procurat. V in the words 
* quibus sine mandatu/ it was ' inquibusine ;' the 

f Digest, lib. 3, tit. 3. Gothofr. col. 85. 

s Digest, lib. 2, tit. 14-. Gothofr. col. 62 & 63. 

h Digest, lib. 7, tit. 1. Gothofr. col. 227. 

\ Digest, lib. 2, tit. 8. Gothofr. col. 47. 

k Digest, lib. 2, tit 13. Gothofr. col. 62. 

1 This, if it was any error at all, originally, which is doubt- 
ful, and not rather a mistake of the Corrector, was very easy. 
The original word, as at first written, was probably thus, cjuilem ; 
the long j being used, instead of the short one, i, and the u, 
instead of v. It was evidently the Corrector's mistake to, take 
the cj for q, and the correction was wholly unnecessary. 

* Digest, lib. 3, tit. 1. Gothofr. col. 77. 

» Digest, lib. 3, tit. 3. Gothofr, col. 89, 


< in 'was afterwards expunged, and the s recently 
supplied. L. 65, at the same place °, it was for- 
merly, as may be conjectured, c velitteras ;' another 
1 w T as first added, afterwards the letters ' it ' were; 
inserted ; and so, at last, it became ' velit litteras / 
as it ought. L. 37, ' Be noxai. act. 1 '/ ' Trupo- 
6 ninus' w T as written, an aspirate was anciently add- 
ed, and V, recently, at length converted into Y ; 
for which reason Taurellus does not admit even 
the latter correction. 

Something is to be said, as to those instances 
where the correction is made upon the former 
writing ; the word, which is corrected, being still 
left, for which it is not easy to account. Was 
this done, because, through negligence or haste* 
the obliteration was omitted? or, because, from 
what was written over the place, the Corrector 
thought he had done sufficient ? or, because the 
reading in two manuscripts differed ? or that it 
was a conjectural emendation, without the aid of 
another copy r ? Indeed, 1. 28 s , ( De reb. cred.* 

° Digest, lib. 3, tit. 3. Gothofr. col. 93. 

p This seems a clear instance of the consolidation of the 
letters of two words, when it happens that those which compose 
a part of the latter, are contained in the former, as mentioned 
by Dr. Taylor, in his Elements of the Civil Law, p. 20. See 
Sect. VIII. before. * Inquibusine,' mentioned above, seems 
another such instance, instead of * in quibus sine.' 

i Digest, lib. 9, tit. 4. Gothofr. col. 303, 

r Surely there is no reason for hesitation or doubt, in the 
case of a mode of correction, so frequent, even in modern 
times. No one of the reasons assigned was probably the cause; 


out of s amittai/ was made c amittit ; the i being 
written over it; and yet the letter a was not ex- 
punged, as if it was left to the choice of the reader, 
which reading he would prefer. Taurellus places 
it as a various reading in the margin. But, L 36, 
under the same title \ it was ' eamdem,' and an- 
ciently, € n 9 was written over the ' m,' without any 
obliteration ; and there it was evidently done to 
correct. So also, 1. 7, c De offic. prsesid.",' c de~ 
* tractandem * remained, € i ' only being written 
over c dJ Besides, 1. 2, c De in diem addict. *,' 
instead of 6 pura venditio est/ it was written c pure 
? venditio est ; the a, indeed, being written over 
it ; but the e was not obliterated, as if both read- 
ings might stand. Lastly, 1. 58, £ De eedilit. edict/ 

but the intention was to substitute one word or letter in the 
place of another. To have scraped out, with a knife, the 
word intended to be removed, or to have struck it through 
with cross lines, might, according to circumstances, have 
made a greater and more apparent blemish, than to cover 
the faulty word or letter with that which ought to stand in its 
place; writing this last, perhaps, something stronger. And, 
although this mode does not entirely obscure the original word 
or letter, it is yet sufficiently obvious what the correction is in- 
tended to be. Those acquainted with copies of deeds, &c, 
made by law or writing stationers, know this is an usual prac- 
tice, where the alteration is trifling, and can be made tolerably 
to suit with the original passage, without introducing a conspi* 
cuous blemish. 

3 Digest, lib. 12, tit. 1. Gothofr. col. 360. 

* Digest, lib. 12, tit. 1. Gothofr. col. 361. 

u Digest, lib. 1, tit. 16. Gothofr. col. S4-. 

x Digest, lib. 18, tit. 2, Gothofr. col. 5.5Q* 


sect. 1 > r , in the words c an servus retinendus sit,* 
an ordinary Corrector has placed c restituendus/ 
without expunging c retinendus ;' but this was af- 
terwards, by a more recent hand, crossed through 
with the nail, which is singular. And no less so 
is that which occurs, 1. 27, ' De servit. prsed. urb-V 
where it was erroneously ' in loco sui locum fecit/ 
' cui ' and c sol ' were very recently inserted, nor 
was any thing expunged ; so that it now stands cor- 
rectly c in loco cui sol fuit a .' Similar things have 
been admitted by the Copyists themselves : so, for 
example, 1. 7, ' De minorib.V m tne inscription 
over the word ' Gains,' the word c Idem ' is 
written in the same red ink. Lastly, there are, 
elsewhere, corrections of the corrections them- 

Ignorance of the language, and of ancient 
custom, was also one fault of the Correctors, 
through which they were guilty of mistakes. L. 3, 
sect. 3, c De offic. prsef. vigil. ,' it is c coerrare cal- 

y Digest, lib. 21, tit. 1. Gothofr. col. 688. 

2 Digest, lib. 8, tit. 2. Gothofr. col. 252. 

a There is no doubt of the propriety of this last reading, for 
the context in the law itself plainly requires it; but the process, 
as described by Brencman in the text, does not produce it. 

b Digest, lib. 4-, tit. 4. Gothofr. col. 124. But in this there 
must have been originally some mistake ; for law 7 comes from 
Ulpian, not Gaius ; and no two of Gaius's laws, of which there are 
three or four under that head, come together. Perhaps Gaius 
was written by mistake, instead of Idem, which last was meant 
to refer to Ulpian. 

c Digest, lib. 1, tit. 15. Gothofr, col. 2& 


''datum cum hamis ;' but to'hamis' was very re- 
cently added, over it, the letter r, without doubt 
that it might be read s cum armis ; for the Correc- 
tor seems little to have understood what connexion 
there could have been between c vigilibus,' and 
" hamis/ or what this last could mean. The mode 
of expression, ' pridie Kalendas,' has troubled the 
Correctors, even though they were ancient. So 
L 5, ' Be feriis d ,' and elsewhere. L. 27, 6 De 
6 procurat.V it was elegantly written, c si quis 
6 omnia judicii ab eo transferrin &c. ; but a recent 
hand has made it c judicia/ that it might agree 
with 'omnia;' and thus has very foolishly cor- 
rupted an excellent place. L. 34, c De recept. 
6 qui arbitr. recep.V in the same place, it was ele- 
gantly written ' quorum nomina simul emit ;' but 
somewhat later, r was written over it, that it might 
become ' erunt /—-nor did the Corrector under- 
stand that excellent phrase, c pari passu ire, am- 
c > bulare.' L. 8, c Si pars hered. pet a. ",' c parte ce- 
', dere,' some person has changed into 6 partem 
c cedere,' Besides, I. 5, c De rei vindie.'Y it was 
rightly, and like a lawyer, written c in quantum 
'■ paret ;' but, instead of this, a more recent per- 
son has made it ' appareV L. 13, sect. 7, 6 De 

d Digest, lib. 2, tit. 12. Gothofr. col. 56, 

e Digest, lib. % tit. 3. Gothofr. col. 87. 

f Digest, lib. 3, tit. 8. Gothofr. col. 154. 

6 Digest, lib. 5, tit. 4-. Gothofr. col. 195. 

h Digest, lib. 6, tit. L Gothofr. col. 198. 


< usufr.y it was < aditus posticasve vertere •/ some 
late person, by writing e over it, has made it c pos- 
( ticasve evertere ;' as if that letter had once been 
omitted. Lastly, 1. 8, at the end, ' Si servit. 
( vindic.V to the words ' in Ursi Juli,' a hand, by 
no means ancient, has added e horto.' 

They have sometimes, under pretence of cor- 
recting, corrupted correct places from those that 
were faulty. L. 1, ' Quod quisque jur. in alt. 
e statu V was correctly written ' aliquid novi juris 
' optinuerit ;' but, because it was erroneously said 
above, ' si quid in aliquem novi juris statuerat,' 
the i in ' optinuerit,' was transformed into a, a 
small hooked line being added ; but, afterwards, 
more correctly, the former passage was corrected 
from the latter. L. 9, e De recept. qui arbitr. 
' recep. m ,' it was rightly ' si liber factus fecerit ;' 
over it was anciently written * re,' that it might be 
c fecererit ;' but, because this could be of no use, 
it is probable that he who thus corrected it, in- 
stead of ' fecerit/ read c recepit,' on account of 
the near resemblance in form of the letters F, P, 
and Rj in the Florentine Pandects n . Again, the 

» Digest, lib. 7, tit. 1. Gothofr. col. 217, 

* Digest, lib. 8, tit. 5. Gothofr. col. 270. 

1 Digest, lib. 2, tit. 2. Gothofr. col. 42. 

m Digest, lib. 4, tit. 8. Gothofr. col: 146, 

n There seems here some reason to question, whether Brenc- 
man understood this correction, and is not rather mistaken. A 
great deal, it is true, would depend on the precise spot, where 
the syllable 're* stood> over the other letters ; but it is surely 

B B 


rubric of the title ' De in diem addictione V at 
this very day, labours under a fault ; for it has 
f additione,' with the omission of c ; and from that 
circumstance, 1. 1, the c is expunged in the word 
y addictio ?;* 

Some corrections shall now be noticed of a 
silly and ridiculous nature, made by very recent 
hands. L. 9, % Si quis caution, in judlc. sis ea p,' 
it was read, ' si servus judicio se sisti,' &c. ; but, 
as a servant was not of sufficient rank to sustain 
a law-suit, some more recent person wrote c i * 
over it ; and so 'servus' passed into c Servius,' 
but beyond all doubt foolishly ; since, from what 
follows, it may appear that the stipulation was 
nugatory. With this may be also compared 1. 13, in 
the same place <*.— L. 19, sect. 3, c Be nego. gest.%* 
it was very rightly written * imprudens rem meara 
c emisti et ignorans usucepisti \ but some person, 

more probable that it was meant to produce the word * refe* 
* cent/ which will make a consistent sense. The words of the 
law, as they now stand in print, are: * Sed, si in servum com- 
1 promittatur, et liber sententiam dixerit, puto, si liber factus- 
4 fecerit, consentientibus partibus, valere.' See * Corpus Juris 
4 Givilis, a Dionysio Gothofredo,' 4to. 1619, part i. (Digest, 
lib. 4, tit. 8, law 9,) col, 146. By i refecerit,' the Corrector 
might, perhaps, mean to express, that what had been done by 
the arbitrator, when he was a slave, should be done over again, 
after he became free. 

n Digest, lib. 18, tit. 2. Gothofr. col. 550. 

° Digest, lib. 18, tit. 2. Gothofr. col. 550. 

t Digest, lib. 2, tit, II. Gothofr. col. 54. 

9 Digest, lib. 2, tit, 11. Gothofr. col. 55. 

r Digest, lib. 3, tit. 5. Gothofr. col. 101, 


thinking that the subject of usueaption was fo- 
reign to the title, where the question was agitated, 
as to the transacting the concerns of another ; in- 
stead of ' usucepisti,' placed the word £ snscepisti.' 
And the same person, or a Corrector like him, 
1. 24 5 , in the same place, before the words c pro* 
c prietates quidem per procurationem non adqui- 
\ ritur,' prefixed ' nee' Fie did not, indeed, think 
that he was committing an error, when, 1. 32, in 
the same place 1 , out of c in qua lite,' 'he made ' in 
6 quali tate ;' for, without doubt, he erroneously 
conjoined, in his mind, c in qualite,' which is no- 
thing ; an d it might easily seem that i ta,' before 
f te ' had been omitted u . Moreover, the same 
person, in the words next following c quia preedo 
f fidejussor, non videturV changed the word 
c prsedo ' into 6 prsedio,' by writing above it i, be- 
cause the passage, a little before, treats ' de prae- 
6 diis et hypothecis v .' But, in the next law, which 
is the 32d, under the title c De negot. gest.%' he 
has again erred, in separating words, and, indeed, 
very foolishly. It was there written ' uxorem qua? 

5 Digest, lib. 3, tit. 5. Gothofr. col. 102, 

1 Digest, lib. 3, tit. 5. Gothofr. col. 104. 

u J In qua lite,' might possibly be conceived, if taken as one 
word, a monogram for * in qualitate ;' as the letters « ta.' intro- 
duced before the He,' might, perhaps, be obtained by repeating 
the t before the e, and the a before the 1. 

x Digest, lib. 3, tit. 5. Gothofr. col. 101, 

y Digest, lib. 3, tit. 5. Gothofr. col. 104. 

1 Pigest, lib. 3, tit, 5> Gothofr. col, 104- 

B B 2 


c res viri tempore nuptiarum ;' &c. but he, not- 
being able to digest the word f quaeres/ added an 
n to it ; and so made it ' quaerens,' an excellent 
sense ! as if it had been c uxorem quaerens vir 
tf tempore nuptiarum.' An emendation, of the 
same degree of acumen, is observable at the end 
of 1. 1, c De calumniatorib.V 6 Pecuniam autem 
c accepisse dicemus, etiamsi aliquid pro pecunia 
6 acceptum,' where he converts '■ acceptum * into 
c accepimus,' because truly c dicemus r preceded it. 
This Corrector seems to have ceased with 1. 7, in 
the same place where he, without any necessity, 
has changed ' et ' into c - etiam V Again, 1. 20, ' De 
' inoffic, testam. ,' where it rightly stood c nee alh 
6 ne umquam,' &c. ( ne' was recently obliterated, 
and, in its stead, ' as' was substituted between the 
verses, and, with another equal instance of teme- 
rity, it was made e unquam,' with an n. It now, 
therefore, insipidly reads c nee alias unquam. 9 
Lastly, 1. 23, sect. 3, ' De servitut. praedior. rustic. d / 
instead of 6 jus sibi esse fundi,' another trifling 
smatterer has made it 6 jus sibi esse eundi.' 

But enough of Correctors: let us now inquire 
into the modes of correcting. 

The office of the Correctors was plainly com- 
prehended in altering errors, in supplying omis- 
sions, in expunging superfluous words, in pointing 

a Digest, lib. 3, tit. 6. Gothofr. col. 107. 

b Digest, lib. 3, tit. 6. Gothofr. col. 108. 

c Digest, lib. 5, tit. 2. Gothofr. col. 175. 

d Digest, lib. 8, tit. 2. Gotlic- col. 261. 


out the real and proper order of passages mispla- 
ced^ in connecting* those inconsiderately separated, 
and in separating* such as were confused and im- 
properly connected : these they indicated by signs 
or marks, which they called correctorial ; but the 
principal correctorial mark is that for expunging. 

One great advantage to the Florentine manu- 
script consists in the singular modesty in expung- 
ing and making other corrections, and particularly 
the ancient ones ; for the original writing appears 
through, and is clearly discernible. Formerly, 
the mode of writing was on wax, to which custom 
the modes of speaking, well known in the law, refer ; 
such as -~in prima, secunda cera;' as does also 
the office or dignity of ' Primicerius,' or the chief 
secretary. At that time a passage, recently writ- 
ten, was obliterated with the other end of the 
style, by making the wax even and smooth with 
the blunt end of the style, with which they wrote, 
in order that fresh letters might be written ; or, if 
the wax had been dried by time, and hardened, 
they appear to have softened it with oil, and thus 
to have smoothed it, for the purpose of obliterating 
the writing. To the former method belongs what 
Horace has said, ' Ssepe stilum vertas ;' and to the 
latter, allude the words c delere ' and 4 litura :' for, 
as they made use of the word ' exarare/ from the 
resemblance to furrows, which was produced in 
writing on wax, so ' delere ' was used for the act 
of taking away, sweeping away ; whether it came 
from the old word Leo, in Greek Asm, that is to 

b b 3 


say, To render even and smooth ; or, whether it is 
compounded of 6 de ' and ' oleo,' a vowel being 
omitted, whence, also, s aboleo ' is derived : from 
' lino/ the preterite of which is borrowed from the 
obsolete word s leo,' comes certainly 6 litura,' and 
perhaps c litera ' itself. Appositely to this purpose,. 
Cicero says, c Cum mendum scripturee litura tol- 
6 latur.' To this also answers the Greek l^tixdpsw, 
as if it were said 6 exungere,' that is to say, To 
smear out, to obliterate : indeed, c interlinere ' is 
also used to signify ' delere/ not only by Cicero, 
but especially by Ulpian and other lawyers, by 
whom, however, it is also sometimes distinguished 
from the verb ' delere.' But that it is derived from 
' linio/ cannot even be suspected, since, if it came 
from c linea/ we should not say e interlinere,' but 
* interlineare,' as if the line had been drawn 
through the letter, and thus it would correspond 
with liayudpcLv. But as there are also many phrases 
applicable to that early mode of obliterating, so 
there are also others, such as ' inducere ' and 6 ex- 
i tinguere/ derived, as it were, c ab inducendo oleo,* 
from washing out with oil, with which was origin- 
ally written what was to be expunged. We may, 
therefore, congratulate ourselves and posterity, 
throughout all ages, on the circumstance that this 
copy is not erased and corrected in the ancient 

.Among these obliterations of the Florentine 
manuscript, those that are ancient are clearly to be 
distinguished from such as were recent, whether 


it were an obliteration of one letter or many, or 
whether one syllable only, or whole words or whole 
verses, were to be expunged. The obliteration of one 
or two letters was formerly made by a point, whence 
those letters which are thus obliterated, are said 
f expungi,' to be expunged. But nothing is more re- 
markable, as to that ancient point of obliteration^ 
than the place which is over the letters ; nor is it> 
as happens in other manuscripts, as well Greek as 
Latin, written beneath. The books of the Pandect 
are the only ones now known, that have this indica- 
tion for the expunging of a letter placed above, 
and not underneath ; following, in that, the ex- 
ample of Hebrew manuscripts e . As to the He- 
brew, certainly this method is not wonderful; for^ 
since they mark the vowels by points, and write 
them under the consonants, it was necessary to 
take care that the point for expunging was not 
confounded with the vowels. For a contrary rea- 
son^ it was necessary that, in Greek manuscripts, 
this point should be placed underneath ; for, al- 
though the accents were not anciently written, 
they yet had two points, which used to be placed 
over i and r , which might erroneously have been 
taken for points of obliteration. In the transcripts 
of the Pandects, made by Greek scribes, the same 

€ Perhaps the Copyists or Correctors, or both, might have 
been Greek Jews, and have, therefore, followed the method 
which they knew to prevail in transcripts of the Scriptures in 

B B 4 


proofs of the ancient mode of writing are observe 
able ; and sometimes they create considerable dif- 
ficulty and trouble. Whenever, therefore, T occurs 
to be obliterated, instead of two points, written 
one over each horn, one is placed in the middle ; 
and from this it may be collected, that those points 
for the I and T were not originally put in by the 
Copyist, but were, by the Corrector, in reading 
over the manuscript, placed over them, otherwise 
three points together would appear. This conjec- 
ture receives additional strength from the circum- 
stance, that neither point, whether that for I or T, 
are every where to be constantly observed, since it 
might more easily be omitted, in reading it over^ 
than in writing. 

However, as has been said, a point, as a mark 
for expunging, was placed over one or two letters. 
But the letters, thus expunged, might be said to 
be c gratiose expunctse,' neatly expunged, as Mo- 
destinus speaks, 1. 8, £ Be administr. rer. ad civit. 
c pertin.y but in another sense. If any of the sub- 
sequent letters were to be expunged, they were ex- 
cluded from the rest of the writing, by small hooks 
placed over them and facing each other, like a 
kind of parenthesis ; in order that an accumulated 
heap of several points in one place, might not of- 
fend the eyes of the reader^ and point out heavier 
errors and mistakes. Where whole words were to 
be expunged, this method was still more frequently 

f Digest, lib. 50, tit. 8. Gothofr. eoh 194-7. 


practised; but if a whole period, and several 
verses, were through mistake repeated, then, at 
the beginning and end of each verse, these marks 
appear, placed in like manner, quite to the end of 
the superfluous words. If the passages to be ex- 
punged, begin with one or two letters at the end 
of a verse, or if they end with its beginning, those 
letters are, in the usual manner, taken away, by a 
point placed over them ; and the rest are included 
within hooks. As to the form of these marks, 
they are sometimes so small, as to resemble two 
Greek aspirates, facing each other, and are even 
almost reduced to the smallness of two spots. 
The former may be said to be diminutive paren- 
theses, or an embryo of them ; the latter may be 
termed hooked points. But, if parentheses of a 
proper size are introduced into the writing, as hap- 
pens in an instance which is given in the preceding 
chapter", these can scarcely be thought the work 
of an ordinary Corrector : even Augustinus him- 
self says, ' Eum fuisse veteribus delendi niorem, 
' ut verba illis semicirculis ineluderent.' From 
that circumstance he judges as to the antiquity of 
the hand that made the corrections; and faults 
have been committed, through ignorance of this 

8 The instance referred to, is this, from 1. 18, sect. 2, ' De 
' manumiss. vind.', and the words are in that preceding chapter 
thus printed : ' Filius quoque voluntate patris apud patrem ma- 

* numitrere (non potest Filius quoque voluntate patris apud 

* patrem manumittere) potent,' 


Besides, to the desire of being sparing, in cor- 
rections of the writing, it is to be attributed, that 
false and erroneous letters frequently, and as far as 
it could be done, were transformed into those that 
were true or correct, either by means of a pen or 
pen-knife, or by some other neat and gentle me- 
thod ; or by several remedies at once. Thus o, by 
erasing the front, is formed into e ; or, on the con- 
trary, e, with the little line taken away, is rounded 
into o; and a similar method was followed in 
changing o into u. Moreover, 1. 2, sect. 1, c Si. 
6 ex noxali cau.V & c - c comsis ti 9 was placed for 
6 euni slsti/ a little line was added in the middle 
of c, the upper part of the o erased, and a line on 
the right side added'. Another example of a 
double remedy is seen in the inscription, 1. 76, 
' De procurator. V in which ( ad Mucium ' is, in 
that manner, changed into c ad Minicium/ that, 
out of the two feet of the u, two letters, ii, might, 
by means of an erasure, be made ; and N, because 
the legs stood somewhat wide, was between the 
top of them inserted. So also, 1. 27, c De nox- 
6 alib. action, 1 / 6 si noxale iudicio agitur/ after- 
wards 6 was changed into u, and in written above, 
and thus it was made c noxale indicium.' Again, 

h Digest, lib. 2, tit. 9. Gothofr. col. 51. 

1 He should have described the alteration as consisting of 
two perpendicular lines, introduced at the top of the o, instead 
of the curve originally there. 

k Digest, lib. 3, tit. 3. Gothofr. col. 94-. 

1 Digest, lib. 9, tit. 4. Gothofr. col. 301. 


three methods, for the purpose of correcting, are 
applied to these words, 1. 28 m , c De recept. qui 
6 arbitr. recept.' 6 et puto comitutur '-,' w hence was 
made ' et puto committi ; for u being altered, with 
the pen-knife, into ' ti,' ' tur' was included with 
hooks. The latter correction, however, seems, 
both to Brencrnan and Taurellus, suspicious. 
Lastly, 1. 8, at the Julian law, ( de adulter. / in- 
stead of c Papinianus,' it was ' Idem.' The Cor- 
rector expunged ' dem,' and of the remaining f 1/ 
made the upright stroke of a P ; so that that let- 
ter was an intermixture of red colour and black 
ink ; and the rest he wrote over it. 

The later Correctors were not so scrupulous, 
from whose corrections those by earlier persons 
are, on account of their singular modesty, easily 
distinguishable. But, in proportion as they are 
later, they are more rude, and less intelligent, 
agreeably to the barbarism of those ages. The 
Correctors of the middle and later age, also, 
like their predecessors, used points in expung- 
ing, but placed under, not over, the letters ; 
and even introduced into the body of the letter it- 

m Digest, lib. 3. tit. 8. Gothofr. col. 151. 

n The passage here referred to, stands col. 151, in Gotho- 
fred ; but it is not quite in the same words : for he reads i ut 
' puta quanti ea res erit.' The four last words he, however, 
prints in Italic, as if he entertained doubts of their authen- 

° Digest, lib. 48, tit. 5. Gothofr. col. 1813. 


self. L. 50, ( Be jure dot.?,' at the end, in c hoc 

< tibi tradiderim,' ' tradiderim ' was changed into 
* tradiderit,' the m being expunged, with a point 
underneath, and in the body of the letter, and t 
being written over : and this correction is both 
later and erroneous. Again, 1. 20, f De inoffic. 

< testam.V the words c nee ali. ne unquam' are 
very grossly corrupted into ' nee alias unquam ;' 
but there are three points placed above the c ne/ 
and three more below ; and to place points in this 
manner, to surround letters, is not the* ancient 
economy of punctuation. Lastly, accidental blots 
also, and such as arose from the touch of the op- 
posite page of writing, and others of that kind, 
sometimes produce a sort of correction. 

Again, some Correctors drew a line under the 
words to be expunged, or even cut the letters 
themselves through with a line, which they drew 
across them. Afterwards they made use of a double 
method ; for, either they made the line perpendi- 
cular, if one letter was to be expunged, or trans- 
versely, if there were more. Some persons, also, 
crossed passages with their nail, as a caution, as 
they were reading ; and Taurellus himself com- 
plains, that the writing was disfigured by a letter 
with the scratch of a nail under it, which he calls 
1 confossa literal Again, when an old letter seem- 

p Digest, lib, 28, tit. 3. Gothofr. col. 757. 
9 Digest, lib. 5, tit. 2. Gothofr. col. 175. 
* This is like the method, by which schoolmasters, when 


ed too faint, and almost illegible, some of them re^ 
freshed it. So, 1. 35, c De pactis V as to a redun- 
dant letter in c absentes eruant,' which was for- 
merly expunged. So, 1. 3, e De servitut.y several 
letters in * servituperficies,' instead of ( superficies,* 
which were formerly included between small hooks, 
are struck through with a late line. Again, 1. 15, 
■ De negot. gest.",' it was written ' Pomponius 
6 libro vicensimo sexto injuriarumgotiis gestis ;* 
as if, for instance, the scribe meant to have added 
the subject discussed, and, at the same time, 
having discovered his error, endeavoured to be- 
stow as little trouble as possible on the correction. 
An old Corrector, out of ' iu, ? made ( ne;' ' riarum ! 
he included within hooks from above. A later, 
thinking this scarcely sufficient, crossed ' riarum * 
through with a line. Lastly, in the rubric of the 
title x , < Expilatee hereditatis/ it was ' heredibus- 
* tatis,' and the superfluous syllable * bus' was in- 
closed with red hooks, that is to say, by the Co- 
pyist himself; but another afterwards crossed that 
syllable through with ink. 

Some cancelled an erroneous passage, after it 
was written, that is to say, drew lines across, 
through the letters themselves, in the manner of a 

correcting a boy's exercise, point out the faulty places, to be 
^afterwards corrected by the boy himself. 

s Digest, lib. 2, tit. 14-. Gothofr. col. 69* 

1 Digest, lib. 8, tit. 1. Gothofr. col. 247. 

u Digest, lib. 3, tit. 5. Gothofr. col. 99. 

f Digest, lib. 47, tit. 19. Gothofr. col. 1793» 


lattice. And, indeed, that kind of correction 
which was made with many cross lines, and with 
lines drawn lattice-wise, is not really of so recent 
practice, as the civil lawyers themselves use the 
terms ' cancellare testam en turn, chirographum, 
f tabulas, et cautiones/ instead of ' delere.' Among 
these corrections by lines, such as are more 
heavy and gross discover, as a guide, their age. 

The more recent Correctors, in after-times, 
corrected with a greater degree of violence ; they 
scraped out, they blotted out, with ink laid over, 
or, as it were, spread over, the writing ; and, by 
other similar methods, they have loaded the Flo- 
rentine manuscript with corrections, sometimes 
unnecessarily expunging, sometimes replacing er- 
rors, or retracting their own, when they found 
them too rash and hasty : and this, even while the 
writing was so very recent, that they were able 
to rub out with their finger, as it were with a 
sponge, alterations which they had recently made. 
In doing this, they were sometimes so hasty and 
imprudent, that they even injured the neighbour- 
ing letters. Elsewhere, also, the manuscript may 
be seen injured in a variety of ways. Under the 
title, ' De negot. gest.V 1. 6, sect. 9, instead of 
' dubitari,' it was ' dubitario' or c dubitarid ;' but 
the superabundant letter is obliterated by every 
method ; it is, for instance, marked with a pointy 

1 |- -. J i i n . 

y Digest, lib, 3, tit. 5, Gothofred, col, 98, 


with a line, and with an erasure z . It is curious 
to observe the correction, 1. 37, under the same 
title a , where it was erroneously written *' cui pa- 
c titur,' and rightly corrected i cujus patitur ;*- hut 
the letter u was recently blotted. Some late Cor- 
rector, thinking that the effect of design, which 
was, in fact, only the consequence of chance and 
accident, as if, for instance, the former Corrector 
had immediately repented of his correction, him- 
self introduced ' m,' as if he had meant to make 
it ' cum patitur.' But, if they had recourse to 
the scraping-knife, they sometimes made such 
violent use of it, that they scraped an hole through 
the vellum; for instance, 1. 41, ' De reb. cred.V 
But it rarely happens, that, by the violence of the 
corruptors of that kind, the original word cannot 
be wholly erased. In 1. 3, at the end, ' Quse res 
pign. ,' in c petere potest,' the word f petere' is 
indeed more gently erased, but upon the ancient 
writing is written c habere,' which has wonderfully 
obscured the place, 

Lastly, even abbreviation is admitted among 
the corrections, from which circumstance there is 
less reason to doubt of their age. L. 5, sect. 4 5 

z It may be doubted whether the last letter in * dubitarid 3 
is redundant, as this word is probably a conjunction of two ? 
#nd intended for ' dubitari id.' 

a Digest, lib. 3, tit. 5. Gothofr. col. 105. 

b Digest, lib. 12, tit. 2. Gothofr. col. 363. 

* Digest, lib, 20 3 tit. 3. Gothofr. col. 650. 


at the end, c De reb. eor. qui sub tut. d ,' &c. it was 
erroneously written ' prsetoresse ;' nor was this, 
with others, formerly corrected. At length, by a 
very recent hand, p, abbreviated, was written over 
the line, just before the word c esse/ as if the 
Corrector meant c pree,' and therefore read ' prae- 
c tor praeesse;' but Taurellus seems rightly to have 
conjectured it should be ' preetore posse.' 

None but additions of a few letters were intro- 
duced between the verses ; the rest were placed in 
the margin. To the former, also, some mono- 
grams, and instances of letters written upon others, 
seem referable. But, at the place to be assigned 
for those passages supplied in the margin, various 
marks were formerly used. So the obelus, or ho- 
rizontal dart, which astronomers call the sign of 
the planet Mars, or a circle, with a point in the 
centre, which is called the astronomical sign of 
the Sun, and is described by Harmenopulus. Very 
often, however, in the Florentine manuscript, an 
obelus, or dart, is placed in a sloping direction, 
between a point below, and another above its 
middle, like a dart, another weapon being placed 
the other way, in the margin, so that they may 
seem to face each other ; for cSeKog signifies a spit, 
and from &ho$ it is derived, as being an arrow, 
which resembles a spit. To this critical or cor- 
rectorial mark, the following words of Augustinus 
refer : " Bixi errorem ex illis libris manasse, prop- 

■ „ ,.| __™_, , , , . . „ , , , „ , . -»s 

* Digest, lib. 27, tit, 9, Gotliofr. col. 903. 


" terea quod cum scriberentur, oblitus est libra- 
" rius xlii. capitis (sub tit. Ad leg. Aquil. e ) idque 
" alius ejusdem temporis scriptor in libri margine 
(i nota Obeli (sic eniin Grseci appellant) adjecta 
" scripsit. Seel nostri minime diligentes antiqui- 
" tatis investigatores ejusmodi notas neglexerunt." 
Next in order, follow the marks or signs for 
transposition; for instance, where a word or more 
has been omitted, the Copyists sometimes, if the 
sense would permit it, seem to have carefully 
added it in the context, in order that by this, there 
might be no necessity for introducing it above, 
and so defacing the writing by less necessary ad- 
ditions. But if they had, through carelessness^ 
omitted entire verses, or whole laws, they chose 
rather to introduce these in a very foreign place, 
than to admit those marginal grafts. In the for- 
mer case, the order of the words is pointed out by 
little lines over the words, i, n, in, nil ; in the other 3 
by the numeral letters, #, S, 7, S, But, as in the 
numbers, the first or prior number is prefixed to 
these, which ought to be read first, so also one 
line is used to that word, which ought to stand 
first ; two to the second ; and so on. All these 
little lines, however, whether they are one or 
more, fall on the first letter of the word, which 
certainly, m contiguous writing, was altogether 
necessary. Besides this, which prevailed in whole 
words, the same practice sometimes, though rarely. 

s Digest, lib. 9, tit. 2. Gothofr. col. 290. 

c c 


obtained in single letters. An example occurs^ 
where the Corrector very skilfully uses this me- 
thod, in the emendation of a corrupt passage. Lv 3, 
< De feriis et dilat. f :' for ' Item si res/ it was 
written ' itemresi.' At first, the second s was writ- 
ten above, just before that which was already 
there ; then a little line was placed over the first 
letter of ' si ;' but, over the word ' res/ which was 
in order the second, two lines were placed. 

The marks or indications for joining or disjoin- 
ing chapters, either wrongly separated in the Flo- 
rentine manuscript, or erroneously connected, re- 
main next to be considered : for sometimes a fresh 
law may commence at a wrong place, where the Co- 
pyist, deceived by the usual initial words of the 
laws, begins, from the place where the name of one 
lawyer is cited by another, a fresh law with red. 
On the contrary, which, however, is less frequent, 
two laws are sometimes confounded together, by a 
continuation of the writing. For the connexion of 
those passages which had been improperly sepa- 
rated, an horizontal line used to be drawn through 
the void space which had been wrongly left at the 
end of the preceding passage, except that, perhaps, 
in some cases, as 1.1, sect. 2, ' De rei vindie."/ 
two small horizontal parallel lines may be employ- 
ed, instead of one. For the opposite purpose, of 
separating what had been improperly joined, may 

f Digest, lib. 2, tit. 12. Gothofr. col. 56, 
8 Digest, lib. 6, tit. I. Gothofr. col. 197. 


be seen every where a mark in the margin, like the 
numeral figure 7, of a large size, which some one, 
not badly, has compared to a scythe, especially 
when it is considered that its use was for cutting, 
that is, separating. An instance of this mark is 
to be seen, 1. 35, c De servitu. prsed. rust.V and 
1. 8, ' De pignerat. act/ ' 

The distinctions of the gatherings, by nume- 
rical marks, which seem attributable to the Co- 
pyists, have been already mentioned. But, after- 
wards, the pages also began to be distinguished by 
numbers. Of this regulation, the commencement 
appears in a few of the first books of the Pandect ; 
but by a very late hand : and not in the upper 
margin of the page, but in the inner margin, and 
there frequently in the middle : besides, also, that 
the numbers only occurred occasionally, for not 
all the pages have numbers. Of a recent age it 
appears they are, because they are of the form 
now in use 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, &c. when the genuine Ro- 
man ones were written i, n, in, mi, v, &:e. But 
there are, moreover, alphabetical numerals, by 
the letters a 9 6, y, X ; and these are used^ as well 
in restoring to their places such passages as had 
been transposed, as more especially to mark the or- 
der of the titles. Both of these are rather to be at- 
tributed to the Correctors than Copyists ; especi- 
ally, as they seem to have been added afterwards, 

b Digest, lib. 8, tit. 3. Gothofr. col. 256. 
1 Digest, lib. 13, tit. 7. Gothofr. col. 418. 
C C 2 


when an Index of the titles and the names of the 
lawyers was made ; neither of which came from 
Justinian, or seem to have been of the same age 
as the manuscript. This method prevails through 
some of the former book of the Pandects : but tit. 
4 De sestimatoria V Roman numerals begin. These 
very persons, however, a little further on, when 
they represent the number four, do it thus iv ; but 
not with four units, as they formerly did, and as 
has been observed in the instance of the gather- 
ings. In both these instances a line is placed over 
the numerals : but, as this line begins from a 
point or head, and ends in another, it tends to 
confirm a conjecture, that it was intended for the 
letter N, extended in breadth ; for that is the ini- 
tial letter of the word Numerus. 

In discussing the subject of the ancient Punc- 
tuation, it is labour in vain to inquire as to the 
primeval points of the Pandects, of which it may 
truly be said, as it was of the shipwrecked fleet of 
iEneas, by the poet, 

* Apparent rari nantes in gurgite vasto.' 

In these and other interpunctuations, the subse- 
quent age was more liberal, not to say prodigal : 
for these first interpunctuations were rare, and like 
mere beginnings and rudiments for distinguishing 
the writing, which mode of distinction became at 
length more and more perfect and settled. The. 

k Digest, lib. 19, tit. 3. Gothofr. col. 622. 


old mode of distinction in the Pandects, appears 
also simple and uniform, that is to say, as consist- 
ing of one point placed in a space ; but rarely of 
two points, unless^ perhaps, in the inscriptions of 
the laws. But the points themselves, when they 
began to be more frequently used, seem to have 
supplied the place of Commas. Certainly Commas, 
or the other marks now used for dividing writing, 
do not occur in the Florentine manuscript, unless 
here and there introduced by a later hand : for, if 
any point (especially that added to the line which 
is used to denote the letter m) seems to deviate 
into the form of a Comma, it was produced from 
haste and the flow of writing. 

The recent Points of the Pandects are to be, at 
least principally, imputed to those who consulted 
it, and therefore may chiefly be referred to the 
13th and 14th century; for, since, in those bar- 
barous times, it was very difficult, in continued writ- 
ing, to find any passage, they, for the purpose of as- 
sisting in the reading, began to place Points to the 
words, by which one word might be separated 
from another. This most manifestly appears from 
1. 37, 38, and the last, ' De legib. 1 / where this is 
admitted, with a wonderful degree of caution ; for 
not only is the Point placed at the side near each 
word, but sometimes the members of the same 
word are separated by a Point, thrust in between 
them, especially in compound words, the Preposi- 

1 Digest, lib. 1, tit. 3. Gothofr. col, 13. 

c c 3 


tion, or other adscititious particle, being by this 
method separated. But sometimes two monosyl- 
lables, or Adverbs of few syllables, are included 
together. The same may be observed, in 1. 3, 5, 
6, 7, & 8, ' Quod met. cau. m ,' where the Points are 
placed sometimes above and sometimes below, 
according to the convenience of the person putting 
them in, and the space of the letters. In other 
places, these are very rare ; for some small faint 
Point here and there is found inserted above, but 
not easily will so many be found together. 

The Comma itself, in its original, was nothing 
more than a small Point, drawn from above, witira, 
faint line, which declined to the left, as if to indicate 
or show the Point, which otherwise, in a continued 
line of writing, might lie hid. This is the more 
credible, because sometimes, at the end of the 
little line, employed to denote m, at the faint 
Point usually added to it, a similar line was drawn 
cross in this manner |. Without all doubt, it was 
drawn perpendicularly, and not horizontally (as is 
now, indeed, also done in the Point of Admiration), 
because, in a continued succession of letters, the 
proximity and form did not admit of an horizontal 
or straight line. Another method of interpunctu- 
ation is observable in the third Constitution before 
the Pandect, besides the aforesaid Comma, which 
is also there frequently used, that is to say, the 
letter i, with two dots, instead of one over it, and 

m Digest, lib. 4, tit, 2. Gothofr. col. 110. 


once, also, the exact modern Comma ; and there, 
also, the former line begins to be curled, like a 
modern Comma with two dots over it : these cer- 
tainly are of the 14th century, to which period 
various corrections seem referable. 

Lastly, single or solitary Points are inserted in 
some of the laws. But, if there is any ground for 
conjecture, it may be supposed that these were 
partly put in by some one reading it over atten- 
tively, who, laying down his pen, has stopped, and, 
as it seems, marked how far in reading he had 
proceeded, while he considered, or read over again, 
the former parts. In some places it may also be 
conceived, that a word or period, on which the 
hinge of that question for which it was consulted, 
turned, might be distinguished with a Point, or 
mark of that kind, that it might again the more 
easily be found by the person consulting it. So, 
for example, 1. 6, sect. 3, ' De negot. gest. 11 ,' one 
recent point is found between the words ( non mei 
s contemplatione/ and those c sed sui lucri causa :' 
as to which, it should seem that there was some 
controversy then on foot. So, also, after ' deliquit,* 
L 35, in the same place °, and also 1. 20, at the 
end, 6 De do. ma. p , ? after ' in rem domini,* and so 
elsewhere. Again, other points are plainly super- 
abundant, and have, as far as it can be perceived, 

* Digest, lib. 3, tit. 5. Gothofr. col. 98. 
P Digest, lib. 3, tit. 5. Gothofr. col. 104. 
» Digest, lib. 4, tit. 3. Gothofr. col. 120« 

c c 4 


no meaning or use; as if by chance or caprice 
they had been introduced into the Florentine ma- 
nuscript ji. Some of these occur below, and some 
above the letters : others are intermixed among 
the writing itself, no regular method, as to situa^ 
tion or form, being observed. Some, also, of these 
Points occur in small numbers together, some in 
moderate numbers, while others are found to con- 
sist of several collected and accumulated together. 
Among the modern separations and divisions 
of the writing or distinctions, and critical marks, 
is also to be reckoned the mark of a Paragraph, 
which itself is sometimes introduced into the Flo- 
rentine manuscript, as well in the margin, as more 
especially in the context. The origin of the Para- 
graph is Greek, as its name plainly shows : but 
' 7rapo£yp<xp2p/ means nothing more than c ad- 
e scribere / and thence comes c 7rapdypx(pog 9 ad- 
c script us/ namely, %&po&j&$fi But the Greeks ra- 
ther prefer speaking in the feminine, Trc&pocypo&fp^ 
substantively, that is to say, < adscriptio, adnota- 

' tip..' Isocrates, lisp: o&VTilcg, says, ' Av^dpsvog octto 
6 r'Yjg Ylocpa,ypoc^T,g ctvdyvooQi to, urspt Yjys^cvixg.' — c Inci- 
c piens a Paragraphs recita quae ad prsefecturam 
\ pertinent. ■ But 7rago&yga<pq means, also, ' Prse- 

$ Mere dots or marks like these, will not always, it is true, 
point out the reason for which they were introduced ; but that 
they had a meaning, and were not the effect of chance or ca^ 
price, is extremely clear. Probably, they might be private 
marks of some one who consulted it, intended to be, as no 
doubt they were, understood by himself, but by no ope else. 


f : scriptio, Exceptio ;' because, perhaps, the excep- 
tions were immediately written under, and follow- 
ed the decrees. At Rome, indeed, in decisions of 
the strict law, the praetor added to the formula 
< Extra quam si,' &c. As to what concerns the 
form of the Paragraph, that, from its nature and 
the meaning of the word, might be various, since 
every mark and every character written, might be 
called a Paragraph. But, in his time, Isidorus 
teaches that the figure of the Paragraph was an- 
gular r . To this, the marks of Paragraphs in the 
Florentine manuscript nearly approach, which are 
formed, as appears from a cut given by Brencman, 
like the small Roman p, with a sloping line from 
right to left, drawn through its head and front line. 
But this figure, Brencman says, with a very little al- 
teration, might easily be converted into one like the 
letter S, as if it were composed of two semicircles 
fronting each other, and touching in the middle ; 
and lastly to the modern §. However, as to the 
early and more simple form, which is angular, 
many have formed conjectures. It may be thought 
half of the letter IT, thus F } with a cross line 
brought down in a sloping direction, that it might 

r Brencman has inserted a cut, to show the form, which, for 
want of a proper type to represent it, could not be here insert- 
ed. A verbal description will perhaps, however, answer the 
purpose of conveying an adequate idea. Its nearest resemblance 
is the capital Greek r, with a sloping line to connect the hori- 
zontal and perpendicular, which makes it completely that of a 


not be confounded with Gamma; but H is the 
initial letter of the word Uu^dy^u(pog. This was 
therefore wisely imitated in the Pandect, where 
the true Latin P, made with a longer tail, and a 
cross line brought sloping down from the top, as 
a mark of an abbreviation, occurs. The reason 
why the whole IT was not placed, might be for the 
sake of contraction, lest it should occupy too much 

It has been before remarked, as to the Points, 
that, on account of the difficulty of reading and 
searching, where the writing was one continued 
line, some of them seem to have been placed there 
by persons consulting the manuscript; but others, 
also, these same persons seem to have placed 
there, for their own use, for the sake of a parti- 
cular passage, in order that they might more rea- 
dily find it again. It appears that some of them, 
moreover, were intended to point out passages 
particularly remarkable, which had been found 
in reading it, especially where a fault was sus- 
pected, or the place was not understood, or was 
really corrupt. Again, also, it has been already 
shown, that some persons, in gratitude, interpunc- 
tuated the context in reading it, and separated the 
context by the mark the Paragraph. 

In reading over authors, the ancients also 
placed, in the margin, marks of approbation or 
disapprobation, or other indications, to point out a 
place in other respects remarkable. Many Greek 
manuscripts show this, in which, in an old hand 3 



is written c <n?,' that is to say, the beginning of 
( ihffLMcrMiy signare, notare ; some also wrote c mf"? 
as we moderns use to do c N a .' and e N. B.' conjoin- 
ed into one, by making the last line of theN serve 
also for the upright stroke of the B : so, therefore, 
in a barbarous age, were placed in the Pandect, not 
in one place only, marks, compounded in a variety 
of ways of the four letters, N, O, T, A, but so 
constructed, that they could not here be represent- 
ed by the printers types. For the purpose of 
pointing out faulty places, or those suspected, or 
difficult to be understood, they seem to have used 
two marginal notes ; these were, the letter m, 
with a small stroke before and after, and one 
over its head, and the figure 9, with a small stroke 
over it. The first, which, as Brencman observes, 
resembles m, with a small stroke on each side, 
seems to denote ' mendum, a fault.' So, 1. 42 and 
43, 4 De rei vind. 1 ' and elsewhere ; and more fully 
than that above, 1. 38, ( Mandati s ,' there is a 
double mark, thus, ~~ m ra — , as if it was intended 
for 6 mendum mendum,' that is to say, ' magnum 
( mendum,' a great fault. And there is another, 
again, with one m only, before 1. 44, in the same 
place K But, on account of the Gothic form of 
this m, that note seems older than the others, al- 
though it is difficult to say that it is as old as the 
time of the ordinary Corrector of the Pandects ; 

r Digest, lib. 6, tit. 1, Gothofr. col. 204. 
s Digest, lib. 17, tit. 1. Gothofr. col. 509. 
s Digest, lib. 17, tit. 1. Gothofr. col. 509. 



or that, therefore, he should be accused of gross 
negligence. Perhaps, which is probable, an old 
possessor of the manuscript has read it over in 
those places more diligently, and has left these 
traces of his accuracy. The latter note is of a 
more recent age, and is only seen in some certain 
places ; and there it occurs very frequently. So, 
1. 5 and 6 ; 1. 27, sect. 2 ; 1. 38, < De minorib.V 
&c. But as, in the common method of abbrevi- 
ation, c 9,' for c con,' is used, it may be the begin- 
ning of the word e considerandum/ as if this place 
were to be weighed and examined more diligently. 
Of the other notes of abbreviation and margi- 
nal notes, no explanation can be given ; so various 
are they in form, and so different the places in 
which they occur ; just, for instance, as if every 
one consulting it had made use of his own parti- 
cular mark, and in places favouring his own cause, 
without any relation to the book itself, or common 
jurisprudence in general. Among these, however, 
nothing is more frequent than the form of the 
cross ; but its figure and size, and sometimes its 
place and situation, are extremely different. It is 
imagined that the places, opposite to which they 
occur, created some difficulty to the readers ; or, 
as Brencman, p. 190, quaintly remarks, c crucem 
' figerunt legentibus.' But they are accustomed, 
generally, to be placed in the outer margin, as if 
they were intended to mark the best part in the 

u Digest., lib. 4, tit. 4?. Gothofr. col. 124, 130, 132. 


subjects. Iii one or two places, a larger cross, in 
red colour, is erected in the middle of the margin, 
but which concerns the Copyists, as has been said, 
when their follies were examined. In the context 
of the letters itself, and between versicles, the 
mark or sign of the cross seldom occurs. 

Besides crosses and lines, placed in various 
manners, 9 also occurs opposite 1. 7, c Quod met. 
c cau. x ; ? and, which is very singular, 1. 9, sect. 2, 
' Be eontrah. empt.V before e owiuj in a Lom- 
bard hand (as other written words show), in the 
outer margin, is found a mark, which, from its 
irregular form, it is impossible to describe, and, 
indeed, it is needless to do so. It is used instead 
of the word c Grec' which usually denotes a Greek 
passage. But, that the remarkable simplicity and 
unskilf ulness of these ages may more plainly ap- 
pear, they sometimes have placed, between the 
verses and over proper names, the letters, n. p. ; 
that is to say, c nomen proprium,' that it might 
not be confounded with common appellatives ; for, 
as to writing c Grec' to denote Greek passages, 
the Copyists may be pardoned on account of the 
ambiguity of the letters. Indeed, 1. 5, c Quod met. 
' cau.V over ' Labeo,' and 1. 7, in the same place 3 , 

x Digest, lib. 4, tit. 2. Gothofr. col. 110. 
y Digest, lib. 18, tit. 1. Gothofr. col. 534. 
2 Digest, lib. 4, tit. 2, Gothofr. col. 110. 
a Ibid. But in this last place, in the * Corpus Juris Civilis/ 
by Gothofred, the passage does not read Pedius, but Petrus. 


above c Pedius/ ' n. p.' are written in small letters, 
that the words, in the line above, might not suffer 
from contact. But elsewhere than in that chap- 
ter, it will scarcely be found that the interlineary 
explanation seems to be from any of the more rud§ 
persons b . 

b Brencman, p e 159, &c, and the authorities there cited 



Supposed Authority of Grammarians not to be 
admitted or received. 

Aristotle's contradictory opinions as to Iambic. — Objections to 
them, and the contradictions pointed out. — Terentianus 
Maurus's definition of Iambic verse censured. — His account 
of Trochaic catalectic reprehended. — His description of the 
Iambic in another place. — His account of Scazontic Iambic. 
—Of Iambic catalectic Tetrameter. — Objections to all these. 
— -Plotius, his description of the Palimbacchiac*— Objections 
to it.— Mallius Theodorus's opinion as to Choriambic— 
Censured. — Diomedes, his sentiments as to Iambic. — His 
opinion on Trochaic. — Another passage from him on Tro- 
chaic. — Objections to these. — Victorinus, his opinion on 
Choriambic. — Objections to it.— His sentiments on Ionic. 
—Objections to them, — His opinion on Phalsecian. — Ob- 
jection to it. — His opinion as to the admission of the 
Trochee with the Iambus. — Remarks on it. — Several other 
instances of erroneous descriptions from Servius and Victo- 
rinus. — An instance from Suidas. — Caesura claimed as a 
Licence for a long syllable — But the Caesura and Licence fall 
in different places. — Remarks on the lines themselves.— All 
the above-mentioned instances may be corrected by a small 
alteration. — Licence of making a diphthong short before a 
vowel not allowable.— The instance explained. — Contraction 
of two vowels unjustly claimed in a particular instance. — A 
line in Homer corrected. — Dividing one word at the end of 
a line absurd, — Rejection of the letter S before a consonant 
not justifiable. — The supposed instance is read differently in 
different copies, and free from any Licence. — Some sup- 
posed instances of Licences in Juvenal and Virgil explained. 


It is not here intended to examine the fact of the 
Ignorance or learning of the ancient Grammarians, 
on the extended question of literature in general ; 
because that, in effect > would be nothing short of 
writing a literary history of the middle ages at 
large ; but the sole object of inquiry shall here be 
confined to exhibiting, with remarks on them, the 
sentiments of some of the most celebrated authors, 
on the point of Versification, which alone concerns 
the present work, in order to prevent an unrea- 
sonable reliance on the authority of the Gramma- 

Aristotle himself, speaking of the Margites of 
Homer, which he describes as a satyrical poem^ 
though it is since known to be spurious c , says, 
that Iambic was well suited to it, because, in this 
kind of verse, mutual reproaches were accustomed 
to be uttered d , When he speaks of Tragedy, he 

c * Et tamen spurius ille Margites, de quo Hephaestion, 

* p. 67, Man us Victorinus, Tzetzes, Chi', iv. 861, vi. Hist. 62, 
e loqui videntur, habuisse dicitur versus lambicos, nullo certo 
s ordine, ant numero, Hexametris interpositos/ — Aristot. De 
Poetice, edit. Tyrwhitt, 8vo. Oxon. 1794, p. 127, in a note on 
Sect. 7. 

d ' Twv ]uav av 7Tpo Opvga adeyoj e'^ojuev e/ttsTv roiSroy ttooj^o.* s;xo> as 
e tivou TToX^a,-. owro ds O^c^a a.p£;a,ju.E'yoi£, ipiv' owv, Ikeiw o MapystTn?, 

* KCti TC4 T0JC&UTG&, h ol$ X.CA TO dPJXOTTOV 'lX[jMi7oV "HAS? jU,6Tpov* diO X«l 

' tapSuov KOtXevroLi vvv, on h tw jast^w t^tw Iku^i*ov ct,Xkri\ov$* — 
c Ante aetatem Homeri, non possumus tale cujusquam Poema 
« commemorare, fortasse vero multa extiterunt : ducto autem 
' initio ab Hom-ero, praesto est nobis ejusmodi poema, exempli 

* gratia, Margites ejus, et similiaj quibus convenientius vide- 


relates that the metre in that was changed from 
Tetrameter to Iambic, as better suiting its dig- 
nity, and because it more resembled common dia- 
logue e ; and yet, in his book e De Rhetorice,' he 
expressly asserts, that the Iambus is to be avoided, 
as being mean, and the very conversation of the 
Vulgar, and not fit for the style of public speaking, 
which ought to be more grand and elevated t: . 

Now, if lam bid suited the Margites, because 
it was fit for railing, it certainly could not agree 
with Tragedy, where no such object existed ; nor, 
if the Iambus was mean, and the very conversa- 
tion of the vulgar, and unfit for public speaking, 
which ought to be more grand and elevated, could 
it suit the dignity of Tragedy, which requires a 
still higher degree of elevated and lofty language, 
than even public speaking itself. 

* batur metrura lambicUrn, quapropter nunc etiam vocatur Iam- 

* bicum, eo quod hoc metro convicia mutuo fundebant.' — Arist. 
De Poetica, edit. Oxon. 1760, p. 6 & 5% 

e l Et* d£ fxsyiQ c sk fuxgwv fxvQdv k'o.1 \[\'zu- <yEXo/ac, ^o. to bk 
' cwrv^ttcS jot,£ o-^s p47rso•Ef^ywQ»J• to te yJrcov sk nrpctu^Tfui lau- 
4 fesTby sysyETO'. Xsf luq di yivoyAvnC) avTn vi ^vVij to o\kuqv pET-pov ivsi' 

* fA&XirO' y&z XE/tTj/coy tZv y.sT^uv tJ la^Jouov E5~t* ' — * Poito autem 
c magnitudoa vilibus fabulis et dictione ridicula sero fiebat illus- 

* trior, eo quod immutatio facta fait a Satyrica Poesi : metrum 

* eh'am ex Tetrametro redditum erat Iambicum. Instituta au« 
■ tern dictione, ipsa Natura proprium metrum invenit ; omnium 

* enim metrorum maxime colloquio accommodatum est Iambi- 
« cum,'— Aristot. De Poetica, edit. Oxon. 1760, p. 7 & 59. 

f l f O $s iaj*/3oc, dvT't sr*v n Xe|;? to tuv ^roXAiy. — ( Iambus autem« 

* est ipsa vulgi locutio, quce himilior est.' — Aristot. De Rhe- 
torice, edit. GouUton, 4to. Lond. J 696, p« 105. 

D D 


Terentianus Maurus, when mentioning the feet 
which the Iambic verse will receive, says, it will 
not receive the Trochee, because the first syllable 
is long in the Trochee, and short in the Iambus &; 
and yet he admits the Dactyl and Spondee, which 
are still more unlike 1 '. The admission of these is 
not doubted, and the question of the admissibility 
of the Trochee, in the original state of the Iam- 
bic, it is supposed, has been already decided'; 
but his reason is evidently absurd, as the cause he 
has assigned for excluding the Trochee, bears still 
stronger against the Dactyl and Spondee, which 
he confesses to be admissible. 

The same author, col. 2434, speaks of Tetra- 
meter Iambic, which he calls e Quadratus Iambi- 
€ cus ;' and then proceeds to describe Trochaic 
catalectic, in the following words : 

* Trochakus catalectlcus qwjiat, 
' Si dempta prima syllaba adjecto pedi est, 

8 * Quid ? non Trochaeus temporum est aeque trium ? 

* Est ; sed TrocliEeo longa prior syllaba : 

* Brevis autem Iambo, longa post ; cui non potest 
' Longara Trochaus subdtre, et brevem suant 

* Brevi sequentis, qua fit hoc Iambicum ; 

* En cur Iambo non Trochaeus serviat; 

* Qui metron ipse copulat Troehaicum : 

* Praebetque noinen, ut loqueraur postmodum/ 

Terentianus Maurus, edit. Putsch, col. 2432. 

** * Spondeon, et quos. iste pes. ex se creat, 
' Admiscuerunt, imparl tamen loco.' 

Ibid. col. 2432, speaking of the Iambic. 

This will clearly justify the Spondee, Dactyl* Anapaest, Proee- 
leusma, and Amphibrachys 
* See Section X. 


* Quem de duobus esse Iambis perspicis : 

* Quod hinc remansit, Creticum reddit pedem : 
" Est celer phaselus ille quem videtis hospites." 

* Quia prima quum sit dempta Iambo duplici, 
' Longam relinqui convenit post alterum 

' Manere Iambum, qui brevem et longum suas 

* Jungens priori perficit dictam pedem. 

* Sic Creticum si quis velit disjungere, 

* Fiet Trochee us, longa et una syllaba.' 

The same author thus speaks of the Iambic, col. 
2434 : 

* Spondeos autem si sequetur Creticum, 
4 Habere primum quem potest lambicus, 

* (Nam primus ipse est separato Cretico) 

* Vel tertio locetur, aut quinto pede : 

* Seriem Trocheei jam labare perspicis.' 

Again, col. 2436, he gives the mode of forming 
the Scazontic Iambic. 

i lambicus hipponadeus claudicans y quijiat. 
'iEque et Trimetro junxit Hipponax pedem 
*- Novissimum trisyllabum ex prima brevi, 

* Longis duabus : antibacchio noraen est. 

* Exemplar ejus tale possis fingere : 

* Phaselus ille quem videtis hospites sabinus : 

* Quadratus ut sit, parte ab ima claudicat.' 

The following method is also given by the same 
author, col. 2437, for forming the Iambic cata- 
lectic Trimeter, which in fact converts it into Tro- 
chaic, as it is now understood. But it is singular, 
that Terentianus Maurus does not treat it as Tro- 
chaic, and as a distinct sort from Iambic ; but he 

D D 2. 


expressly still terms it Iambic, and says, in fact, 
that the catalexis or defect is not at the end, but 
the beginning, which would justify the assertion, 
that Iambic and Trochaic are in substance really 
the same, a point which has already been shown 
on a much better ground -K 

' Iambrcus Trimetrus acephalus quijiat. 

* Sed et Trimetrus (ut quadratus) hie potest 
fr Acephalos esse prima quando demitur ; 

• Fierique primus pes et istic Creticus/ 

To every one of these, there is this substantial 
objection, that, in the very mode of scanning, 
which, to make these verses Iambic, s&ch persons 
as think them so must use, whether by metres or 
feet, neither the Cretic, nor Antibacchius, as he 
calls the Bacchius above, ever occurs, and that it 
is absurd to describe a verse in a different manner 
from that in which it appears when rightly scanned. 

Plotius, edit. Putsch, col. 2G43, mentions the 
Palimbacchiac Comic Trimeter, which he de- 
scribes as containing an Anapaest, an Iambus, a 
Dactyl, and three Iambuses K This, it is true, 
makes it a Trimeter ; but it is by scanning it as an 

1 See Section X. 

k ' Palimbaechium Comicum Trimetrum acatalecticum fit 
hoc modo. Primo pede Anapsesto, secundo lambo, tertio 
Dactylo, tribus lambis, sed novissima syllaba indifferens, in- 
venitur enim Pyrrhichius, qui per communem syllabam finit 
partem orationis.' — Piotius, edit. Putsch, col. 264?3. 


Iambic, in which ail idea of its original form is 
lost. The line which he gives is, 

But the instance, as given by himself, fails, when 
an attempt is made to scan it by the feet, which 
he has described. It ought, most manifestly, to be 
thus scanned: 

AQvjjicg 7rW I y\^Liv TTcgijvyjv o y.%\viKog* 

This latter mode produces the Palimbacchius, from 
which this sort has its name; but it is evident that 
the Greek verse is really a Tetrameter, and not a 
Trimeter ; and it does not appear, from the quan- 
tities he has mentioned, that he could have in- 
tended the Latin line, which is so very different, 
as an example. 

Mallius Theodorus 1 , speaking of Choriambic 
verse, says, it is conveniently formed of three Cho- 
riambuses, a Dactyl, and Spondee, or a Trochee. 
But why may not this be more properly described 
as four Choriambuses and a syllable ? 

Diomedes, edit. Putsch, col. 503, speaking 
6 De Iambico,' says, c In Comoedia quern eunque 
' ex his in sinistris, Tribrachyn, Pyrrhiehium, et 
■i seipsum, aliquando in secundo et sexto loco, et 

1 Fl. Mallius, sc. Manlius Theodorus, lived A. D.. 399.-— 
,Saxii Onon[i. first ; edit. p. 28. 

P P 3 


* Anapaest um et Proceleusniaticum. Quarto vero, 
c aut ipse aut Proceleusmaticus debet esse, magis 
c in quantum potest, ipse Catalexin facit in Bac- 
6 chio.' 

It is well known, that, in the Iambic, the Pyr- 
rhichius, which is only two short syllables, and 
consequent!}- less in value than the Iambus, can 
be admitted no where but in the last foot of an 
acatalectic verse, where it passes for an Iambus, 
because the last syllable at the end of the verse is 

The same author, col. 504, treating f De Tro- 
f chaico,' says, c Catalexin facit aut in Amphima- 
f cro, aut in Epitrito quarto.' 

Again, the same author, col, 508, speaking 
also ' De Trochaico,' says, e Hie fit cum ad lam- 
f bici veri principium additur pes trisyllabus Am- 
' phimacrus.' 

The same objection applies to all these three 
instances from Diomedes, but particularly to this 
last, as has been already before noticed with re^ 
spect to Terentianus Maurus: for, in correctly 
scanning these lines, of which Diomedes speaks, 
neither the Bacchius Amphimacer, nor Epitritus 
quartus, would ever occur. 

Victorinus, col. 2532, thus expresses himself, 
i De Chcriambico Metro : — f Cujus etiam conclu- 
c sione £niri praecipue studium, ut est hoc* [the 
example which he gives], ' quod habet duas lam- 

* bicas priores conjugationes, tertiam Choriambum* 
f ultima lambicaiii clausulam. — Recipit autem Ti> 


' brachyn, eo quod ex Iambo vel Trochseo solutis 
1 nascitur.' Any one would imagine from this, 
that the Tribrachys was intended as equivalent to 
one of the Iambic conjugations ; or, at least, that, 
as he measures above by Iambic conjugations, 
which are combinations of two Iambic feet each, 
he did not here adopt another method. But the 
Tribrachys is only equivalent to one Iambus, and, 
consequently, is but one half of the measure which 
he had before used. 

The same author, Victorinus, col. 2537 (it 
should be 2536), treating ' De Metro lonico,' uses 
these words : ( Recipit hoc metrum Trochaicas 
' Bases, id est, duplicem Trochaeum, qui totidem 
( temporum est, sicut Iambica Basis, Choriambi- 
' cam et Anapaesticam, quod fieri dicunt sed et 
i vocant Kara (rvp7rc&9siv. Similiter Anapaest um et 
' Pyrrhichium geminatos recipit.' This cannot be 
correct, as it stands ; for the Choriambus is equal 
to two Iambuses, and so is the Ionicus, whether 
Major or Minor, and the Anapaest is received in- 
stead of one Iambus only, and considered as an 
exchange for the Spondee. 

Victorinus, also, col. 2566, speaking ( De Pha- 
( laecio Metro,' says, ' Recipit autem Spondeum, 
' Choriambum, Iambum, et syllabam.' This is an 
unequal and irregular mode of division ; for the 
Choriambus is a double foot, and would pass for 
twice as much as the Spondee ; and so it is also 
with respect to the Iambus. To make the division, 
as nearly as possible, equal, which is always a 

D P 4 


point of material importance, the verse ought to, 
be scanned thus ; a Molossus, a Pyrrhichius and 
Trochee conjoined, and a Spondee or Trochee, 

The same author, Vicxorinus, again, col. 2571, 
says, ( - Nam ubicimque syllaba longa est, ibi (Juse 
6 breves poni possunt, exeepia sede ultima, qua 
c pes sextus clauditur, qui semper aut Iambus esse 

* debet aut Pai iambus, quo fit ut longissimus ver- 
$ sus in eo septemdecim est syllabarum, temporum 
\ vero totidem, quot et is qui constat e duodecim 
■I syllabis, qua lege recipit Tribrachyn, etiam Tro- 

* choeum simili temporum mensura admitti potur 
\ isset, quippe cum uterque eorum tribus tempq- 
\ ribus censeantur, sed ne copulatio Trochsei cum 
f Iambo alterius metri speciem induceret, quae aut 

* Choriambo aut Ionico, adempta prima brevi qua 
f Iambus incipit, subsistere videretur, omissum 

- est.' This passage is here given as pointed in 
Putschius's edition ; but it Js so corrupt, in that 
particular, as not to be intelligible. Instead of a 
comma after £ syllabis,' there ought to be a full 
point, and f qua ' should begin with a capital let- 
ter. That part of the passage which, with what 
follows it, is all that is material on the present oc- 
casion, will therefore stand thus : ' Qua lege reci- 
6 pit Trihrachyn, etiam Trochseuni|- simili tempo- 
\ rum mensura, admit ti potuisset,- &c. Pointing 
it in this manner, will make sense of that part of 
the passage, the substance of which is, to say, 
that, by the same rule which admits the Tribra- 
phySj the Trochee, which is equal in value^ might 


have been received; but, lest the Choriambic, or 
Ionic metre, should be thus introduced by the co- 
pulation of the Trochee with the Iambus, the first 
short syllable, with which the Iambus begins, is 
taken away. 

To this absurd passage it is sufficient to an- 
swer, that the process here mentioned, of the ex- 
istence of which there are not, in fact, the smallest 
traces, has for its object, the intention of render- 
ing the Choriambus, in the foot spoken of, a Cre- 
tic ; but the Cretic is not of the same value with 
any metre in the Iambic, and is therefore not ad- 
missible ; nor is there, indeed, the appearance of 
any process in the whole by which the syllable he 
gpeaks of, is actually, or can be reasonably, re- 

Multitudes of instances occur, among the writ- 
ings of the Grammarians, in which, by their ab- 
surd method of describing the verses, all idea of 
their constituent feet is entirely lost ; as, instead 
£>f enumerating what feet they admit, these writers 
say they are made up by a conjunction of two or 
more pieces of different sorts of verse. By this 
method, which completely shows how little they 
were acquainted with the true principles on w r hich 
only a correct system of versification can be form- 
ed, they have been led to place verses of this kind 
under the head of such as consisted of intermixed 
fragments, and were of no determinate sort m . But, 

ra Victorious, col. 2587, entitles his fourth book * Liber 
f Quartus, De connexis inter se atque inconnexis, quae Graecj 


had they known how to have scanned them, which 
they evidently did not, it would have been found, 
that these verses were of a regular species, and 
that the disparity between the feet or metres was 
considerably less than that which they had not 
scrupled to allow as reasonable and admissible in 
the case of Iambic and Trochaic. Of these, the 
following are some specimens : 

* Saturnium constat Dimetro Iambico catalecto 
c et Ithyphallico, ut est hoc, 

* Isis pererrat orbem crinibus, profusis ".* 

But this is really a Bacchiac Tetrameter, and to 
be scanned thus : 

Isis per|errat or|bem crini|bus profusis. 

' Archilochium constat Partheniaco et Ithy- 
* phallico, ut est hoc, 

' Remeavit ab arce tyrannus vultibus cruentis .' 

This also is Bacchiac Tetrameter, and the follow- 
ing is the right mode of scanning it : 

Remeavit ab | arce tyran|nus vulti|bus cruentis. 

6 Asclepiadeium constat Spondeo, duobus Cho- 
6 riambis, et Pyrrhichio, ut est hoc, 

4 ao-wapTvTcc, vocant pragmaticus ;' and Hephaestion, edit. Pau\v ? 
p. 48, has a chapter or section, entitled ' n^< otwiufiirw* 

n Servius, edit. Putsch, col. 1825. 

• Ibid. col. 1825. 


* Vitae pars melior quam cito labitur V 

But this is also Bacchiac Tetrameter, and requires 
to be thus scanned : 

Vitae pars | melior quam | cito labijtur. 

c Archilochium constat penthemimeri Dac- 
' tylica, et Dimetro Iambico, ut est hoc, 

f Sydera cuncta micant decore lucis aureo V 

This, like the others, is also Bacchiac Tetrameter, 
and ought to be thus scanned : 

Sydera cunc'ta micant delcore lucis [ aureo* 

f Archilochium constat Dimetro lambico, et 
' penthemimeri Dactylica, ut est hoc, 

' Indi Lyaeo dediti tympana jam quatiunt V 

This is also a Bacchiac Tetrameter, when properly 
scanned, thus : 

Indi Lylaeo dedilti tympana | jam quatiunt. 

It is worthy of remark, that the appellations 
here bestowed on these verses, by Servius, are by 
no means definite, or such as to characterize them 
precisely ; for three of them are attributed to Ar« 
chilochus, which yet, as described above, by Ser- 
vius, all differ from each other. Servius, it is 
clear, did not understand of what kind they were, 

p Servius, edit. Putsch, col. 1824. 

* Ibid. col. 1S26. r Ibid. col. 1826. 


&nd ;j consequently, was unable to reduce them to 
any thing like regularity; but the real fact is, that 
they are all either Baecbiac, or of some one of 
those kinds, consisting of the musical sesquialteral 
proportion of three to two ; but admitting also, 
as all those sorts do, metres of six times also in 
exchange. The same may be said of several 
others, which he has placed in the same chapter, 
as being, in his idea, verses with confused metres. 
Every one, whose opinion on the subject is en- 
titled to any attention, must know, what indeed 
is self-evideat^ that, in scanning a verse, that me- 
thod is always to be preferred, which will render 
the metres most nearly equal with -each other; 
and all these verses, on experiment, will be found 
to consist of feet or metres equal in value, either 
•to five, at least, or, at most, to six short syllables. 
The disparity, therefore, is but as five to six, which 
is less than that acknowledged and allowed by 
these very persons, the Grammarians, in Iambic 
and Trochaic. This will appear from scanning the 
verses correctly, which, for that very purpose, is 
here done. 

Isis per|errat orjbem crinibus profusis 
Reraeavit ab | arce tyranjnus vultiibus cruentis 
Vitae pars | melior quam | cito la|bitur 
Sydera cuncita micant de|core lucis J aureo 
Indi Ly|a20 dedijti tympana | jam quatiunt. 

Victorinus, col. 2506, speaking, as it seems, of 
the Trochaic, says, i Nam Iambico versui, ut est^ 
* Paratus omne Caesaris periculum, 


f si adjeceris longam, efficies Trochaicum, ut, 

* O paratus omne Cffisaris periculum, 

6 Rursus Trochaico si detrahas primam syllabam 
' Iambicum efficies, velut est, 

' Celer Phaselus ille quern videtis.* 

He ought here to have said, at which end the ad- 
dition to the Iambic was to be made, and whether 
the verse intended to be added to, should be cata- 
lectic or acatalectic. The fact is, the addition 
must be made at the beginning ; and so must the 
rejection of the syllable, to change a verse from 
Trochaic to Iambic. The verse, to be added to, 
must be catalectic, and that detracted from aca- 

The same author, Victor! n as, col. 2508, speak- 
ing ' De tome sive incisione versuum/ which 
is, in fact, what is understood by the Cae- 
sura, directs, in the case of Heroic verse, that 
this pause should be sought for after the syllable 
beyond the second foot, or after that beyond the 
third foot ; and then says, ' Nam si harum neu- 
f tram in veneris, tertium Trochaeum in versu con- 
e quires : id est, Penthemimeren dissyllabo clau- 
• sam, ut est, 

* Infandum regina, 

' Nam percussis duobus pedibus, tertius pes Tro- 
' chseus est, " gina," cui conjuncta brevis " ju, M 
( secundum legem versus Hexametri Daetylum 
& complet ". bes," autem syllaba et sensum supe- 
c rioris coli integrat, ut fiat hephthemimeres, et 


c sequentis pedis initium inducit.' When he speaks 
of the third Trochee, the reader naturally expects 
to find, that two Trochees have preceded ; but it 
is no such thing. He means to say, that, taking 
so much of the third foot, which is a Dactyl, as 
constitutes a Trochee, that is to say, the two first 
syllables, that is the place for the Csesura; but he 
talks absurdly, and contrary to the fact, when he 
says the third foot is a Trochee ; because it is evi- 
dent that foot is a Dactyl, of which a Trochee is 
only a part. In scanning the Heroic, the Trochee 
never occurs ; and it is the most absurd of all me- 
thods, and tends, more than any other mode what* 
ever, to the destruction of all knowledge of scan- 
ning and metre, to describe verses by feet, which 
do not occur in the scanning 5 . 

To these, it cannot be foreign to the subject^ 
to add some more modern instances ; because, al- 
though they do not proceed from the ancient 
Grammarians, they yet concern those who have 
undertaken to lay down rules, and teach the prin- 

E In addition to what has been already said, to show how 
little trust can be placed on the judgment of ancient Critics, 
Grammarians, and Lexicographers, the following passage from 
Suidas, art. Iaj*&fw, is inserted: * 'ia^C/fw. *leq*&i$w' 9 t© J£p/{«v. 

' wj youp o iajuboj £x. £ parting jxaapug. biu ^s r> JSfa 0* oXiyS aoftp- 
' ue'm), irpoturiv piQt piityv* xai v Oju.>ip©s, -/jt' oXiyn jusv to. wpwra.' — Sui- 
das, art. Ia/xCi£w, edit. Basileae, 1544. In English thus: lapGty, 
Ia/*£*£;*y, to reproach. For, as the Iambus consists of a short 
and a long syllable; so reproaches, beginning from a small 
original, proceed to greater extent ; and Homer says, that the 
earliest things were small. 


ciples of Versification ; and the authority of these 
persons may, perhaps, be relied on, though very 
undeservedly, by those who have not taken the 
pains to examine the point accurately. 

The Caesura, or pause, in a verse, is often 
claimed as a justification for making a short syl- 
lable long, in the place where the Caesura occurs 1 ; 
and the following are given as instances : 

' Pectoribus inhians spirantia consulit exta u * 

* Omnia vincit amor et nos cedamus araori x ' 

* Ille latus niveum molH fultus hyacintho » ' 

' Graius homo infectos linquens profugus hymenaeos z .* 

But in the first, third, and fourth lines, the Cae- 
sura does not fall in the same place with the 
Licence. In the first instance, the Caesura falls in 
the middle of the third foot, but the Licence in 
the second. 

Pectorijbus inhijans spi|rantia | consulit [ exta 

In the third instance, the Caesura is in the middle 
of the third foot, the Licence in the middle of the 

Ille laltus nive|um mollli ful|tus hya'cintbo 

1 Lat. Gram. p. 127. Ruddiman, p. 137. 

a Virg. JEn. lib. 4-. v. 64. Lat. Gram. p. 127. Ruddiman, 
p. 137. 

x Virg. Bucol. JEcL 10, v. 69. Lat. Gram. p. 127. Rud- 
diman, p. 137. 

y Virg. Bucol. McL 6, v. 53. Lat. Gram. p. 123. Rud- 
.diman, p. 137. 

2 Virg. Mn. 1. 10, v. 720. Ruddiman, p. 137. 


And in the fourth, the Csesura falls> either in the 
middle of the third, or the middle of the fourth 
foot, and the Licence in the fifth. 

Graius ho[mo infecltos lin'quens profujgus hyme|naeos 


Graius ho[mo infecjtos lin[quens profulgus hymelnaeos 

Had any collection of various readings from 
manuscripts and early editions, where any such 
had been consulted, been made and preserved in 
print by the editors of the classics a 5 merely to 
show how the copies differed, and, without mean- 
ing to decide on their merit, as that might have 
induced them to reject many that might have been 
of use ; or, had an opportunity occurred of con- 
sulting ancient manuscripts on this point, it might 

a Dr. Leng, afterwards Bishop of Norwich, the editor of 
the quarto edition of Terence, printed at Cambridge in 1.701, 
speaks, p. 476, of having collated several ancient copies, and says 
that the book which contained those collations, he should take 
care should be deposited in the library of Catharine Hall, Cam- 
bridge, where any one might easily see why he preferred any one 
reading to another. Bentley, in his * Remarks on Collins's 
4 Discourse of Free-Thinking,' p. 66, speaks of having collected 
20,000 various readings of passages in Terence, as appears from 
the following words in * Fabricii Bibliolheca Latina,' edit. Er- 
nesti, 8vo. Lipsise, 1773, vol. i. p. 53, ' Nam Richardus Bent- 
4 leius, in parte prima Observationum Anglica editarum lingua, 
1 adversus Antonii Collrni Libel! um pro Lfcentia Cogitandi vul- 
' gatum, pag. 66, testatur se collatis variis Codicibus, nota«se 
' farraginem variarum lectionum ad vicies mille ;' but it does 
not seem that it was known what afterwards became of these 


perhaps have been found, that, in some, the fore- 
going lines might have stood in the following 
manner, by which all necessity for Licence is 
avoided ; as they all by the change fall within the 
rule : 

Inhians pectoribus spirantia consulit exta 
Omnia vincit amor nos et cedamus amori 
Ille latus niveum fultus mollibus hyacinthis 
Graius homo infectos profugus linquens hymenseos, . 

So as to these : 

Ferte citi flammas date tela scandite muros b 

Et suceus pecori et lac subducitur agnis c 

Posthabita coluisse Samo hie illius arma d 

Corporum officium est quoniam premere omnia deorsum £ 

Si quid nostra tuis adjicit vexatio rebus f 

Ter sunt conati imponere Pelio OssamS 

no necessity for Licences occurs, if the above lines 
are read as follow : 

Ferte citi flammas date tela et scandite muros h 
Et suceus pecori lac et subducitur agnis 

b Virgil, iEn. lib. 9, v. 37, as cited by Ruddiman, 147* 
c Virgil, Bucol. Jicl. 3, v. 6. Ruddiman, 139. 
d Virgil, JEn. lib. I, v. 16. Ruddiman, 139. 
* Lucretius, as cited by Ruddiman, 139. 
1 Martial, as cited by Ruddiman, 144. 
s Virg. Georg. lib. 1, v. 281. Ruddiman, 139. 
h Maittaire, in his edition of Virgil, edit. 1715, p. 254, gives 
this line thus : 

* Ferte citi ferrum date tela et scandite muros.' 
This circumstance was not known when the passage in the text 
was written ; but it is a plain proof that various readings would 
supply correct lines., instead of faulty ones. 

E £ 


Posthabita. coluisse Sanio nam hie illius arma' 
Corporis officium est quoniam premere omne deorsum 
Si quid nostra tuis addat vexatio rebus 
Ter eonati sunt imponere Pelion Ossam k . 

These changes seem so easily suggested by the 
passages themselves, as to make it probable that 
the Licences have been conjectural emendations by 
some Critic or Grammarian of the middle ages, 
introduced to show his learning; or at least, that, 
if he really found them in any early copy, he had 
preferred them to readings where no Licences oc- 

Among other extraordinary violations of quan- 
tity, the Grammarians have ventured to assert 

1 When no real objection exists against receiving a proposed 
change of expression in an author, Virgil, Horace, or Ovid, for 
instance, it is a very common excuse against admitting it, made 
by prejudiced persons, that the passage suggested is not 
the style of those authors, an idea generally conveyed, by 
saying it is not Virgilian, Horatian, or O vidian. That no such 
attempt may be made, as to this line from Virgil, the following 
line, from the same author, is here given, in which the very 
same mode of expression occurs : 

" Phyllida amo ante alias ; nam me discedere flevit." 

He might have said '■ ea me,' &c. without any injury to the 
metre, and therefore this is a decided preference of the mode 
which he has used. 

k l Imponere Pelio Ossam,' should evidently be *■ Imponere 
{ Pelion Ossam/ on the principle of ' Ponere coronam in caput.' 
See Calepin's Dictionary, edit. 1681, art. Pono, 320, col. b. the 
preposition ' in' governing the accusative case * Pelion,' and 
having the same power in composition, in the verb f imponere/. 
as it has when separate. 


that, in the instance of the Greek Poets, a diph- 
thong is sometimes made short ! , or, as others say, 
common, before a vowel m . The same attempt has 
been made by them to establish this rule in the 
case of Latin Poetry also; and one instance given 
for that purpose, has been the following line from 
Virgil, which has, for another object, been already 
cited : 

* Insulse Ionio in magno quas dira Celaeno V 

The absurdity of the rule in itself, as requiring two 
Licences on the same syllable, has been already 
shown, as it has also, that, in reality, it is only the 
dissolution of the diphthong, the last syllable of 
which, when this dissolution has taken place, suf- 
fers elision, as it ought correctly to do, with the 
first syllable of the succeeding word °. This ma- 
nifestly appears in the following instance : 

\j \j _ 

'XpVO-cOO <z\v(X, (TK7}7r\TpCA) 9 KOit £|A/o"CTc10 | HOiVTUQ 'AfyctlXgV, 

1 * Vocales longae et diphthongi breves essepossunt pro arbi- 
f trio, simodosubsequens dictio a vocali aut diphthongo incipiat.' 
Westminster Greek Grammar, p. 155, before referred to. — 
' Vocalis brevis, ante longain vel diphthongum, corripitur, nisi 

* producatur licentia poetica.' — Ibid. p. 155. 

m < Vocales longae et dipththongi, quando non eliduntur, 

* fiunt communes.' — Ruddiman, p. 139. 

n Virgil, i£n. lib. 3, v. 211. Ruddiman, 139. 

• See Section IX. 

p It is necessary to observe, that, in the Westminster Greek 
Grammar, p. 154, before referred to, there is the following 
rule : * Synseresis est duarum syllabarum in imam contractio, ut 
1 Homer us. 

JE E "2 • - " Xpw/« 


The last syllable of ctva, which Homer, Iliad fit v. 
36, makes short in the following line, 

' Tec <ppovs\ovr avd \ 9v^&v 9 u\f zs 7sXe\scrBca s\^X\Zy 

is in the former verse rendered long by position ; 
because the next word begins with two consonants, 
a rule which prevails in the Greek Prosody ; and it is 
to be observed, that this last verse is also an addi- 
tional authority for the resolution of the diphthong 
as above mentioned. Virgil has copied this particu- 
larity in the following instance : 

* Insula? lonio in magna quas dira Celseno V 

which ought to be thus scanned ; 

Insulaje lonijo in magino quas j dira Ceflseno r ^ 

and in 

* Credimus an qui amant ipsi sibi somnia fingunt s / 

/ »♦ 

<£ Xpucri'w oivee crk^Trfjw, xcu t\icr<rtTo tcccvtxs A%aiou;, 

in which this line is produced as an example of a contraction 
in the first word Xpve-sw; but on this, as on other occasions like 
it, the Grammarians seem either very blind, or very disinge- 
nuous; as they wholly omit to notice that a second Licence 
would be requisite to prevent an elision with the subsequent 

i Virg. ^En. lib. 3, v. 21 1. Ruddiman, p. 139. 

r Ralph Winterton, in his Observations on Hesiod, at the 
end of the Poetse Minores Graeci, in a note on the Operum et 
Dierum Liber, lib. i. v. 1, remarks that the first word, l Jnsulse/ 
in this line, loses, by elision, one of its last vowels. 

8 Virg. Bucol. iEcI. 8, v. 108, as cited by Ruddiman, p. 13& 


€ Qui ' being, as a diphthong, divided into two 
syllables, and the last absorbed in ( amant,' which 
follows it ; but even this, as too great a departure 
from rule, might be avoided, by reading the line 

Credimus anne qui amant ipsi sibi somnia fingunt, 

to which there seems no reasonable objection. 

Many other similar instances might be pro- 
duced ; but they are all, in like manner, resolu- 
tions of the diphthong. 

As an example of the contraction of two syl- 
lables into one, the following line from Homer, 
Iliad A, v. 15, is given in the Westminster Greek 
Grammar, entitled ' Institutio Graecse Gramma- 
c tices compendiaria in usum Regise Scholse West- 
c monasteriensis,' edit, Lond. 1779, p. 154: 

XpvcrcOJ avtx <rx.q7rrgtx/ } xoti s\icr<ri70 iravrag Ayjxixg. 

The contraction is supposed to be in the first foot 
Xfuo-sw, to render that a Spondee l ; but the verse 
will not then scan ; for, if the contraction is made, 
and the whole diphthong is absorbed, as it must re- 
gularly be in the first syllable of #m A which follows 
it, the first foot will not be a Spondee, but a Trochee ; 
for the first syllable of ctva, is short ; as is evident 
in an example from Homer, Iliad j3. v. 36, Which 
has been already inserted. In feet, there is no 

* ' Synasresis est duarum syllabarum in unara eontractio, ut 
* Homerus, 

F. F. 3 


contraction, and the verse will scan correctly thus, 
without any violation : 

In the following line in the Iliad, Book A. v. 4 : 

the Greek Grammar just mentioned, commonly 
known by the appellation of the Westminster Greek 
Grammar, edit. Lond. 1779, p. 155, says, that sAw- 
gia, here, is an instance of a short syllable, made 
long* before a liquid' 1 ; but the fact is not so. 'EAw- 
fa should be ^wp, or $q\oog(o&, by uniting the <? 
with it, which now stands separate. In the former 
case it is derived from the verb AKktkoo, or AXoopty 
Capio, which, in its Active Preterite, forms HXooku, 
and in its Passive Ha&^gh \ To this is added the 
substantive (>icv, which signifies ■ Montis cacumen v ,' 

u * Vocalis brevis, ante mutam, sequente liquida, communis 
e redditur, ut Phocyl. 

" Mi.Tpa. Ti Ttv%s Gso~cn, to yap ^tETpoy Ifii aptrov : * 
4 Moderata diis pra-sta, modus enim est optimus.' 

* Item ante ~t, &t, p, et nonnunquam ante solam liquidam, ut 

* Horn. 

" Auras y sXxfia teu^e HWEcrcri :" 
' Fecitquc ipsos escas canibus." 

x Schrevelli Lexicon, art. AXirav. 

y Ibid. art. Piov : or it might come from Opor, mons, which 
Schrevelius explains in the following manner: ' npo?, soc, to, Dor. 
' pro ovpoc, tof, to, Ion. pro opoc, mons.' Schrevelii Lexicon, art. 

SIM. ....... 


and the plural of which is %ia ; and from the union 
of the two is formed the adjective Hhcepog. Thus 
compounded and formed, the word would signify, 
6 Taken in heaps/ and might probably be intended 
to mean 6 Placed, or lying in heaps/ a signification 
perfectly consistent with the context, where it oc- 
curs. In the latter case, the first part of the word 
is derived from the adverb AyjAcvc, i palam, mani- 
' festo V which has also, for its original, the verb 
Avitooo, c Declaro, Manifesto, Notum facio a ; the 
Perfect Tense of the Indicative Mood of which is, 
in the Active Voice, Astykwea, and the First Indefi- 
nite, Ehjto&ip b . The latter part of the word is the 
plural from the same substantive, pov, l Montis ca- 
*• cumen.' If formed according to this last etymo- 
logy, $'/}Xcd£iM would express i Things openly exposed 
6 in heaps,' or, more familiarly, ' Things exposed 
6 to the open air in heaps/ It is evident that, in 
either of these cases, the first syllable, as being 
written with an t\ 9 is naturally long, and therefore 
no Licence is necessary. 

The Grammarians have also assumed to them- 
selves a Licence, particularly in the case of the 
Lyric and Tragic Poets among the Greeks, of di- 
viding the last word of a verse into two, and trans- 
ferring some of its last syllables to the beginning 
of the next line^ This frequently occurs in their 
divisions of the verses of Pindar, Sophocles, and 

1 Schrevelii Lexicon, art. A«x&?s> 
8 Ibid, art. Aiftoa* & Ibid. 

E E 4 


Aristophanes ; but it arises from a misconception, 
which will be found stated and accounted for in a 
subsequent Section of the present Inquiry; and it 
is, in itself, so repugnant to all ideas of the value 
of Poetry, or the excellence of versification, as 
to afford a very justifiable ground for rejecting a 
regulation of verses, which demands such a sacri- 
fice of Principle and Common Sense. The idea, in 
itself, is puerile and ridiculous in the extreme ; 
and this must be evident to every one. If this di- 
vision is reasonable in one language, it is equally 
so in all ; but would not that critic deservedly be- 
come the object of contempt and derision, who 
should seriously propose to divide, as upon the 
above Licence he might reasonably do, the first 
six verses of Pope's translation of the Iliad in the 
following manner ? 

The wrath of Pe- 
leus' son, the direful spring 
- Of all the Gre- 

cian woes, O Goddess, sing. 
That wrath, which hurl'd to PIu^ 
to's gloomy reign, 
The souls of migh- 
ty chiefs, untimely slain ; 
Whose limbs, unbu- 
ried on the Trojan shore, 
The hungry dogs and gree- 
dy vultures tore. 

The practice itself is indeed so highly tending 
to ridicule, that, in English at leasts it is never 
employed, but for the purpose of heightening the 




ridicule. In the Counter Scume, a ludicrous poem, 
which occurs in Dryden's Miscellany, edit. I8mo. 
1716, vol. i. p. 333, into which it had been copied 
from a quarto edition, originally separately pub- 
lished, in or about the time of Charles the Second, 
there is such a division, evidently introduced as 
being more burlesque. The lines are these : 

* Even from the long pike to the tay- 
* lor's bodkin.' 

In the case of Pindar, and the same may be 
said with respect to Horace, many of the Odes are 
certainly wrong divided ; and, in order to rectify 
them, a better regulation will be found proposed 
in a subsequent Section of this work c . 

Strong reason exists for believing- that the 
above observations, together with what has been 
already said in Section VIII. will be amply suffi- 
cient to remove all Poetical Licences from the 
systems of both Latin and Greek Prosodia. The 
instances already given, abundantly show that the 
rules, as at present laid down, in both, are corrupt 
in the extreme, and require revision and settlement 
upon a much more enlarged and extended principle 
than that of which their original authors had any 
conception d . Two more instances only shall here 

c See Sect. XXX. 

d The rules of Prosodia, as they stand in Lily's Grammar, 
though usually taught in schools, do not seem entitled to much 
respect ; nor does the subject appear to have been sufficiently 
attended to, or adequately understood, either as to its nature or 


be produced ; for it is endless to multiply ex- 
amples of this kind. 

importance, by the very persons who have professed to write 
on Grammar and Versification. Manwaring, in his Introduc- 
tion to his Stichology, before referred to, p. 1, has said, ' At 

* the reformation of learning, this part of literature was the 
' least considered; for, in 1521, Whittington condemns the 
' Grammarians for teaching Latin, without teaching the quanti- 

* ties ;' and observes, < the youth were so surprised, when exa- 
4 mined in the particular quantities of syllables, as if amazed at 
' what was never heard or known of: and Despauter, when he 
' treats of Proportion and Number, refers us to Niger, and only 

* mentions it as not unuseful, but not very necessary.' To evi- 
dence the former fact, he gives the following passage: * Si 
i quaeras cujusque syllabae quantitatem, defixo vultu haerent, 

* tanquam incognitum et inauditum obstupescentes.' Rob. Whit- 
tington, Laureat. Cond. Lect. S. D. Lib. 2. And, as proof of 
the latter, the following: * De Proportione et aliis, non inuti- 
< libus, sed nee multum necessariis, videte, si vultis, vel Ni- 

* grum, vel ahum.' Desp. Versific. Art. L. 1, p. 363. The 
Prosody (in Lily's Grammar) was at first very short, and bore 
the title of * Regulse Versificales.' Bale ascribes them to Tho- 
mas Robertson, who was afterwards Dean of Durham. Biogra- 
phia Britannica, first edit. p. 2969, art. Lilye, on the authority 
of Dr. Ward's Preface to his edition of Lilye's Grammar, Lond. 
1732. Camden published, in 1597, his Greek Grammar, for 
the use of Westminster School. Biogr. Brit. edit. orig. 1 123, art. 
Garnden. The title to it appears there also to have been ' Gram- 
i matices Grascae Institutio compendiaria, in usurn Regiae Scholae 

* Westmonasteriensis ;' so that the Westminster Greek Gram* 
mar, used throughout this Inquiry, with the title of ' Institutio 
' Grsecae Grammatices compendiaria, in usum Regiae Scholae 

* Westmonasteriensis,' is the same book ; and, indeed, it is so 
acknowledged to be in Dr. Ward's Preface to it. Bishop Wil- 
kins, in his Real Character, p. 443, &c. justly objects to the Latin 
Grammar, as abounding with unnecessary rules, besides having 
a vast multitude of exceptions ; and it is most certainly true 
that both Lilye's Grammar, though so highly and unreasonably 
esteemed, and Camden's Greek one, though drawn up by a man 


In the Greek Grammar before cited, it is said, 
p. 155, that the Greek 2 is sometimes rejected, 
notwithstanding that the position of the syllables 
forbids it ; or, in other words, notwithstanding that 
the syllable is long by position e ; and the example 
given is the following, from Aratus : 

' ' CIpyj sayrs^iTi yJpcoQ'i 7roKv(poovog kcpoovti. 

But the line here given, is no instance, because 
in some places it is read 7to\\)$oova xopoov^ ; and so 
Kirchner has given it, in the Epitome prefixed to 
his Prosodia Grseca, 4to. Basil, 1644, under the 
head ' Exceptiones tres.' ,'■!. De Positione f .' Be- 

of abilities sufficient to have produced a far better, will be found, 
by all who duly examine them, as they have been, on experi- 
ment, by the author of the present work, extremely far from 
deserving of use. So great, indeed, are their faults, that, if 
the present Inquiry meets with that degree of attention which, 
from the importance of its subject, there is reason to expect, it 
is in contemplation to publish,, in a separate volume, another 
work, for the purpose of regulating, at least, the syntax of both 
languages on much better principles and authorities, byway of 
examples, than has yet been attempted, adequate materials for. 
which are already collected. 

e ' S tamen aliquando eliditur nulla positione facta, ut Arat* 

f ' 3. Sigma nonnunquam videtur evanescere, ut apud Horn. 
1 31/ He then gives the line in Greek, another from the 
Odyssey, e. 237, and a third from Oppian, h 133, no one of 
which, if properly scanned, justifies the supposition; after which, 
he adds, ' Sed in hoc versu Arati, qui est 1002:; 

"npvj £cr~Sfir) 5tpw£V] <iTo7\V$uvGq -/.Ofxvri. 

' pro veoKvQmqs legitur ^oXv^ma,/ The Epitome is not paged, 
and therefore it can only be said that the passage is at the back 
of the leaf marked A 3. 


sides this, the line is probahly corrupt ; for, as it 
stands at present, there must be a Poetical Li- 
cence to prevent the elision of the last syllable of 
Q,fli with the first syllable of the succeeding" word, 
Priscian, in his tract e De Versibus Comicis,* 
edit. Putsch, col. 1320, says, that the poets reject- 
ed the letter S, and of this he has inserted three 
lines as examples ; no one of which proves his 
point ?. His words are these : ' S quoque, cum 
' rauissime necessitate carminis vim consonantis 
' amittit apud Grsecos, ut Homerus in Boetia: ttc~ 
Xvgd-pvXoy S* *1<;igli<xv. Idem in (p. Iliados : 

* Ouai %xdiMZV$0C$ sXvjyev lev ^vcc y <z7\}C In y.(zKXov? 

6 Idem in Odyssea : 

— - — 7rcAc^w fjLcy&y, sjds 2<7iS7r&ovovi 

In the first instance, as has been already shown 
m Section IX. there is a Spondee in the fifth place, 
and an Amphibrachys in the last, and conse^ 
quently the S is not rejected. The two others are 

s In ancient Latin manuscripts, the termination « us ' is fre» 
quently denoted by the letter * u,' with a sloping line over it. 
In a nearly similar manner * ns ' is also represented ; as this last 
consists of the letter n, with a like sloping line over it. This 
fact is mentioned by Brencman, in his Historia Pandectarum, 
p. 122; and the example he produces is the Florentine manu- 
script of the Pandect, in which those modes occur. Ignorant 
Grammarians, of the early ages, have been probably, from 
seeing those marks, led to conclude that the 5 was omitted in 
consequence of an elision, to justify which they have erroneously 
supposed these instances examples of Poetical Licence. 


only evidence that although, where a word ended 
with a short vowel, and the next word began with 
two consonants, it was sometimes, in the Greek Pro- 
sodia, considered as long by position, in the same 
manner as if the vowel and two consonants had 
occurred in the same word, or one consonant had 
been in one word, and the other consonant in the 
other h ; yet the rule seems, in some measure, op- 
tional, and might be departed from, as it has been 
in these instances, in which, therefore, there is also 
no rejection of the S. In Latin Poetry, of which 
Priscian, in his tract, is more particularly speak- 
ing, this mode of rendering a syllable long by po- 
sition, is not generally acknowledged. Juvenal 
has used it in the line, £ :: 

' Occulta spolia et plures de pace triumphos ;* 

and so has Virgil in this : 

* Ferte citi flammas date tela scandite muros 1 :* 

h * Vocalis brevis, ante duas consonantes, aut duplicem, in 
' eadem dictione, aut diversis positione ionga est, ut, 

"' llcty Steps, ttcv to* Tofoy ? l§t ffripo?»TS5 p*foi. 
* Pandare, ubi tibi arcus, et volucres sagitts:? Horn. 

' Brevis autem finalis ante duplicem vel duas simplices haud raro 
i corripitur: ut idem, Oirs Zjw.v>9ov sx ov * quique Zacynthum te- 
*nebant: nh Zxaaav^, et Scamander.' — * Institutio Grsecae 
5 Grammatices compendiaria,' edit. 1795, p. 154. 

1 * Si vox prcecedens in vocalem brevem desinat, et sequens 

* a duabus consonantibus, vel una duplici, incipiat, raro ea vo- 

* calis positione producitur ; quanquam hoc interdum factum 

* reperiatur, ut 

c Virg. Perte citi Saromas date tela seandiie mnrcs. 
1 Jnv. Occulta plures do pace triumphas." 
Kuddiman, p. 109. 


if the passages are not corrupt, which, particularly 
in the last, it is very probable they are K But if 
they are correct, the Latin poets probably did it in 
imitation of the Greeks, and to show they knew 
it occurred in their writings. The introduction of 
this method, in Latin Poetry, as being a departure 
from established usage and rule, is, if it can be 
at all justified, only to be considered as a Licence. 
The introduction, and not the omission, is the 
Licence ; for the use of this mode is very rarely to 
be found in the Latin poets ] , Prisciaii could not 
but know this; and his opinion, as to the rejection 
of the letter S, is wholly without foundation. 

The critics, however, who profess such atten- 
tion to the rules and writings of the Greek au~ 

K It has already been observed, in a former page, that, i» 
Maittaire's edition of Virgil, this last line stands thus: 
* Ferte citi ferrum date tela et scandite rauros,' 

which completely removes the Licence ; and in the former, from 
Juvenal, the introduction of the conjunction f et,' which very 
probably, and indeed apparently the context would justify, 
would remove the difficulty or peculiarity thus : 
Occulta et spolia et pluves de pace trimnphos. 

1 ( At si prior dictio in vocalem brevem exeat, sequente dua- 
s bus consonantibus, incipiente, interdum, sed rarius, produci- 
* tur, ut 

' Occulta spolia et plures de pace triumphos,* 

Jti'v. viii. 107. 

Latin Grammar, p. 131. In a note on the above passage it is 
there said, referring to the word producitur, « Rarissime extra 
« cassuram.' In the above instance, it does not fall where the 
Caesura takes place ; for that is after the words, * spolia, et.' 


thors, seem, in some cases, to have been unac- 
quainted with the rules of the Grammarians, 
and to have misunderstood the difficulties with 
which they had met. In the following line 
of Virgil, 

' Te Corydon, O Alexi, trahit sua quemque voluptas/ 

these persons say, that the O is made short, 
as preceding a vowel m . The Greek Grammar, 
before mentioned, says, p. 109, that sometimes 
the first vowel of the succeeding word suffers eli- 
sion, as co 9f /oiSs, O bone ; co W£, O rex ; to 'vSpwrS) 
O homo ; instead of co ayaQs, oo ocva,^ to av6goo?rs n ; 

m * O autem interdum corripitur, ut Virg. 

4 Te Corydon, 6 Alexi, trahit sua quemque voluntas." 
Ruddiman, p. 139. 

n < Aliquando eliditur prima vocalis sequentis dictionis, ut 
' u 'yuQi 9 o bone ; u \cc%, o rex ; w \9pa«rs, o homo ; pro u <xyo>Mv t 
* w avaf, w avG^wTE.' ' Institutio Graecse Grammatices compen- 
' diaria, in usum Regiae Scholae Westmonasteriensis,' Lond. 
1779, p. 154. — Homer, in his Iliad, book A. v. 74, seems to 
have used this method, as nearly as possible, in the manner in 
which it is applied by Virgil. The line is this : 

Thus it stands, but erroneously, in the printed editions ; in order 
to make the second syllable of A^AXsy short, by the rejection 
of one of the two letters a, which, if the word were properly 
spelt, would otherwise render it long by position. But this is 
evidently a corruption introduced by the Grammarians, as the 
above rule absorbs the short first syllable of A^iAXsv, and places, 
in its stead, the long syllable ft. This, with the second syllable 


and it is remarkable that all these instances ex- 
actly correspond with the line- in Virgil, as being 
all of them examples of the preservation of the 
interjection O, and the elision of the subsequent 
vowel with it. The general rule in elisions is, it 
is true, that it is the first vowel which is lost, and 
consequently the quantity of that which stands, 
must be what that vowel itself, which stands, can 
regularly claim. In Latin Poetry, ' O' never suf- 
fers elision, and that rule Virgil has here observed ; 
but as the rule, in the Greek Prosodia, preserves 
the first syllable, and destroys the second, the 
quantity of the syllable must therefore be that of 
the first vowel. In the line, in Virgil, which seems 
founded on some such instances as these, in the 
Greek writers, the syllable ( O ' is ' not short, but 
remains long, in its natural quantity. It is the 
first syllable of Alexi which perishes, and therefore 
the last syllable of Corydon, and the O together, 
constitute a Spondee in the second foot, and not a 
Dactyl, as has been erroneously supposed,. 

In all the foregoing instances, the reader can- 
not fail to perceive how little the above-mentioned 
persons, and the same may be truly said of a great 
many more of the same class, merit the eulogium 

of A^iXXsu, in its natural correct state of being made long, con- 
stitutes a Spondee in the first place, instead of the Dactyl, 
which the Grammarians have unsuccessfully laboured to pro» : 


passed on them by Cicero De Divio, as cited by 
Bishop Warburton, in the Preface to his Shake- 
spear : f Quorum omnium Interpretes., ut Gram- 
6 matici, Poetarum proxime ad eoruin, quos inter- 
* pretantur, divinationem videntur accedere.' 

F F 



Aristotle s Tract De Poelica not to be trusted, and 


Aristotle's tract De Poetica much relied on by classical scho- 
lars. — Aristotle, when he lived. — Pate of his writings after 
his death. — Doubtful whether the treatise De Poetica, by 
Aristotle the Stagyrite. — If his, it is probably corrupt and 

It has been the practice, with classical scho- 
lars, to rely much on the writings of Aristotle, 
and to consider that tract, De Poetica, now 
published as his, as the foundation and basis of 
all that ought to be said or believed on the history 
and nature of Poetry in general, but particularly 
on that branch of it which relates to the Drama. 
With how little justice and discretion this depend- 
ence has been thus placed on it, will be evident 
from the following circumstances, which, though 
by no means generally known, are yet essentially 
necessary to the forming a right judgment. 

Aristotle died in the third year of the 114th 
Olympiad °, which would be about 320 years be- 
fore our Saviour p ; and it may be truly affirmed, 

° Saxius, vol. i. p. 76. 

? Helvici Chronologia, p. 70, 71. 


that the works of no author exist, or have been 
published, under greater disadvantages, or more 
suspicious circumstances, either as to the authen- 
ticity or accuracy of the different tracts. Gale, in 
his Court of the Gentiles, part ii. p. 369, gives, 
on the authority of Diogenes Laertius, Athenaeus, 
Strabo, Plutarch, and other authors of estimation, 
an account, to the following effect, of the fate of 
the writings of Aristotle, subsequent to the death 
of their author. Aristotle dying, left his books 
to Theophrastus, his successor. By him they 
were left to Neleus, who was also a disciple of 
Aristotle, as Diogenes Laertius relates ; and Ne- 
leus sold them to Ptolomy Philaclelphus, who, ac- 
cording to Athenaeus, transferred them into his 
library at Alexandria. Isaac Casaubon, in his 
Commentary at the end of his edition of Athe- 
nseus, lib. i. cap. 2, says Aristotle's library was 
first possessed by Theophrastus, and by his Will it 
descended to Neleus. The fact, says he, is ascer- 
tained by Strabo, Plutarch, and Diogenes Laertius ; 
and it may be seen from Strabo, how true it is 
that Ptolomy bought the books of this philosopher 
from Neleus, or his posterity, &c. Gale has in- 
serted the very words of Strabo, which will also 
be found given in the note "' ; but they evidently 

i 'Aiyy'-TTw Pac-iXiocs /3<jSa*oG»jk>ic q-yvTa|iv.' — ' Aristotle was the first, 
* that we know of, who collected books, and taught the kings of 
Egypt to erect a library.' Gale, part ii. p. 369. 

F F 2 


amount to no more than this, that Aristotle was 
the first person known, who collected hooks, and 
taught the kings of Egypt to erect a library ; and 
so Gale has there translated them. This, certainly, 
by no means proves the fact. What is said, as to 
Ptolomy's purchasing Aristotle's books from Ne- 
ieus, says Gale, some understand of his library 
only. Those books which Aristotle himself wrote, 
Neleus is reported to have retained for himself, 
and to have transmitted them to his posterity, 
who, being unlearned, kept them locked up, with- 
out using them. Hence, says he, Strabo calls 
them KctrdxXyga, /3/&A/#, books locked up. It is 
said, adds Gale, most probably on the authority 
of Strabo, that these persons, fearing that the 
kings of Pergamus, who erected a great library, 
which was afterwards, by Cleopatra, transferred 
to Alexandria, should deprive them of them, hid 
them long under ground; in consequence of which, 
they sustained great injury, and became mouldy, 
worm-eaten, moth-eaten, &c. After this, they 
were bought by Apellico, of Teios, who appears, 
from Athenaeus, to have been residing at Athens 
as a citizen. He caused these worm-eaten books 
of Aristotle to be transcribed and made public^ 
but without judgment or fidelity ; and, after his 
death, Sylla, about 200 years after Aristotle's 
death, on the taking of Athens, obtained posses- 
sion of these books. Sylla sent them to Rome, as 
Plutarch relates, in the life of Sylla, where Tyran- 
nic, a grammarian, obtained, from the keeper of 



the library, the use of them. The venders of ma- 
nuscripts got them transcribed, but by incompe- 
tent Copyists, who would not be at the trouble of 
comparing their transcripts with the original ex- 
and from that circumstance, Aristotle's 
wtfrks received still further injury r . Tyrannio 
delivered them over to Andronicus of Rhodes, 
who was the first that took any care for the more 
exact and repeated transcribing of them, in order 
for their publication'. 

Coelio Curio, the second, has said, that there 
remain, extant, only three genuine pieces of Aris- 
totle, his History of Animals, his book On the 
World, and his Rhetoric, addressed to Alexander; 
but Gale says, that assertion is not correct, for that 
there are many other pieces of Aristotle, which 
carry with them evident marks of his spirit, as his 
book Usol 'EgpyvsioLs, also his 'Avoi,Xmnioi 9 both parts, 

tions XXIV. and XXV. the true reasons why these and other 
manuscripts remained uncorrected. The Copyists trusted to 
the beauty of the hand-writing, as the means of obtaining a 
greater price for their copies: they studiously, therefore, avoided 
disfiguring them by alterations, which at once would strike the 
eye, and discover their carelessness : for this reason, they pre- 
ferred leaving the faults uncorrected, which they knew could 
not be discovered without reading over the whole manuscript, 
but would escape detection in merely turning it over. 

6 Or rather circulation, by means of the distribution and 
sale of manuscript copies, made under his direction, no doubt 
by persons employed by him for that purpose. Before the in- 
vention- of Printing, this must have been the only possible mode 
©f distribution. 

FF 3 


and his books $v<r.tMJg ^oaasocg; and those On the 
Soui, &c. : yet it is very probable, adds he, that the 
book On the Universe, reckoned among Aristotle's 
works, was not his, because it has too orthodox 
sentiments of God, his Providence and Govern- 
ment, of which Aristotle seems not to approve. 
That other piece, also, On Rhetoric, addressed to 
Alexander, mentioned by Ccelio Curio, is supposed 
not to be by Aristotle, but by Anaximenes of 
Lampsacus, who was also master to Alexander the 
Great, See Vossius De Philosoph. Sect. cap. 17, 
sect. 13 f . 

* Gale, part ii. p. 369. No evidence of authenticity can be 
adduced from the manner or period in which they first appeared 
in print. ' Aristotelis Stagiritae opera Graeca plaeraque primus 

* excudit Aldus, Venetiis, in diversis voluminibus, in folio; ad- 

* jectis passim Theophrasti quoque libris. Ultima vero et cas- 
i tigatissima, quod sciam, seditio Graeca prodiit, Basileae, ex 

* officina eruditi sane diligentissimique typographi Michaelis 

* Isingrinii, anno 1539, in fol. Char. 268.' Gesner, Biblioth. 
edit. 1545, fol. 72, b. —Gesner, in his Bibliotheca, as reduced 
into an epitome, and augmented, by Simler, fo. Tigurj, 
1573, says, that the works of Aristotle were, besides other 
places, which he has mentioned, published at Lyons in 16mo; 
and in the same form, at Venice, in 1572 ; after which, occurs 
this passage : 4 Liber, De Poetica, alicubi in Italia excusus, et 
' multis in locis, vetustorum librorum fide, emendatus est, in eo 
' appositae sunt lectionis varietates ab accurato, doctoque ho- 

* mine, his notis V. C, FL. quibus vetustum codicem et Floren- 

* tinam Lectioiiem significari puto. Franciscus Robortellius, in 
' praefatione commentariorum super hunc Aristotelis librum.' 
s Gesneri Bibliotheca, in epitomen redacta, et locupletata per 

* Josiam Simlerum,' fo. Tiguri, 1573, art. Aristoteles, p. 66. 
When Aristotle's tract, « De Poetica,' was first published in 
Greek, ha*s not yet appeared ; but a translation of it into Latin, 


There is no evidence to show that the tracts 
De Poetica, as now received, is really the work of 
Aristotle the Stagyrite, to whom it is ascribed u . 
Alexander Paccius, who translated this book, c De 
6 Poetica,' into Latin x , seems anxious, no wonder, 
to support the authenticity of the original, by say- 
ing, as he does, that it is manifestly Aristotle's, 
meaning the Stagyrite, not only from the style and 
method, but because it is sometimes cited by him, 
in his book, ( De Rhetorice ;' and also by Plutarch, 
and other celebrated Greek and Latin authors > r . 
Now, if Vossius is correct, as there seems no rea- 
son to doubt, in his assertion, that the tract, c De 
' Rhetorice,' is not by Aristotle, but Anaximenes, 

by George Valla, Placent. was published at Venice in 149S; 
and a translation of it, out of Arabic into Latin, by Herm. Ale- 
man, at Venice, in 1481. Copies of both these translations ap- 
pear, from the Catalogue, to be in the Bodleian Library. 

u Diogenes Laertius attributes to Aristotle the Stagyrite 
two books, Artis Poeticae ; and also mentions Poetica unum ; 
but he also speaks of another Aristotle, of Cyrene, who wrote 

* De Poetica.' Diog. Laert. lib. v. in art. Aristoteles. 

x Konigius, in his Bibliotheca, art. Pactius (Alex.), says 
this person was of Florence, and flourished in the year 1537, 
and that he translated Aristotle * De Poetica.' 

y ' De Poetica, opus pulchrum, et necessarium, cum poe- 
1 matibus componendis, turn compositis recte judicandis, ex Aris- 

* totelis offieina prodiisse, manifestissimum est ; non modo prop- 

* ter stilum et ordinem, notissimum cunctis ; verum etiam quo- 

* niam in Rhetoricis ab eodeni interdum allegatur, et a Piu- 

* tarcho quoque non semel, aliisque claris, tam Graeeis, quam 
1 nostris authoribus. Alexander Paccius libri interpres, in 

* epistola ad Nicolaum Leonicum.' — Gesneri Bibliotheca, edit. 
fo. 1545, fo, 77, b. 

FF 4 


that book cannot be received as conclusive evi- 
dence of the fact, in proof of which it is produced, 
because the authenticity of that document itself is 
extremely suspicious. And even though these 
authors may have spoken of the book, 6 De Poe- 
c tica,' as the work of Aristotle, unless they had 
said, as it does not appear they have, which Aris- 
totle they meant, and had identified the book, 
their testimony still would have been useless. Ad- 
mitting all Paccius has said, and supposing the 
authors to whom he alludes, to have expressly 
attributed this tract to Aristotle, without specific 
cally ascertaining which author of that name they 
intended, it amounts to no more than this, that an 
author named Aristotle had written c De Poetica ;* 
nay, even should they ascribe the. tract, ' De Poe- 
' tica,' of which they speak, to Aristotle the Sta- 
gyrite, still it is not ascertained that the tract, at 
present received, is the same with that which Aris- 
totle the Stagyrite wrote ; or, that it is not the work 
of another author of the same name. Without 
evidence of its identity, it cannot be safely attri- 
buted to Aristotle the Stagyrite, especially when it 
is known that Diogenes Laertius, book v. mentions 
eight authors of the name of Aristotle, one of 
whom, Aristotle of Cyrene, is expressly said to 
have written ' De Poetica z .' 

If the tract, e De Poetica,' as now existing, be, 
however, really the production of Aristotle the 

* Diog. Laert. lib. v. in art. Aristoteles. 


Stagyrite, it is still certain, from the facts above 
related, that the writings of that philosopher are 
by no means in the state in which he left them ; 
and the subsequent injuries which they had re- 
ceived from lying so long concealed in a cave, 
amounting almost to annihilation in some parts, 
together with the circumstances of the corrupt 
transcripts, made from them, while in the posses- 
sion of Apellico, and also after their removal to 
Rome ; all tend to render them of little authority, 
and by no means evidence of Aristotle's real opi- 



Latin Comic Metre cannot be Iambic. 

Priscian's opinion that it is Iambic, examined.— Horace's senti- 
ments as to Iambic, examined. — Objections to him and his 
testimony. — Reasons for conceiving it, on the contrary, 
Bacchiac. — Variety of verse in length not allowable. 

I riscian a commences his tract c De Versions Co- 
6 micis,' with the following words : c Cnm non so- 
' lum Terentius, sed etiam Plautus, Ennius, Acci- 
c usque, et Naevius, Pacuvius, Turpiliusque, et 
c omnes, tam Tragcediae, qnam Comoedise veteris 
6 Latinae scriptores, eodem Metri modo Iambici 
sint usi, ut omnibus in locis indifferenter pone- 
' rent quinque pedes, id est, Iambum, vel Tribra- 
' chum, vel Anapaestum, vel Dactylum, vel Spon- 
c deum, absque postremo loco, in quo vel lambum 
' vel Pyrrhichium omnino posuisse inveniuntur, 
6 miror quosdam vel abnegare esse in Terentii Co- 
' mcecliis Metra, vel ea quasi arcana quaedam, et 
c ab omnibus doctis semota, sibi solis esse cognita, 
c confirmare b .' 

The great art shown in this passage to avoid 

a Priscian flourished about the year of our Lord 335. Saxii 
Onomasticon, vol. ii. p. 19. 

b Priscian, edit. Putsch, col. 1319. 


the discussion of the question has been re- 
marked on a former occasion ; and the passage 
itself is now again brought forward to view, solely 
for the purpose of inquiring what reason can be 
found for supposing Latin Comic verse either in 
reality to be, or intended to be, Iambic. 

The original supports for this opinion, if such 
they deserve to be called, were, it is believed, no- 
thing more than a few extremely vague, uncertain, 
and indefinite passages in Horace's Art of Poetry, 
and the supposed fact, that the Latin Comic wri- 
ters intended, in their versification, to follow the 
practice of their predecessors, the Greeks, who, it 
is conceived, by the persons urging this supposition, 
employed that kind of Metre. But both these 
foundations will in the end be found to fail. The 
passages in Horace shall, for the settlement of 
this point, be here distinctly examined; but 
the use of this kind of Metre, by the Greeks, 
the reader will see, in Section XIX. and XX. there 
is every reason to question. Of the passages in 
Horace, the first occurs in the Art of Poetry, 
v. 79, and is in the following words : 

1 Archilochus proprio rabies armavit Iambo, 

* Hunc socci cepere pedem grandesque cothurni, ... . 

1 Alternis aptum sermonibus, et populares 

f Vincentem strepitus, et natum rebus agendis.' 

Even this passage does not affirm that the Tragic 
or Comic verse was Iambic ; for, it only says the 
writers used that foot, the Iambus, in their verses, 



which they might have done in exchange for some 
other, nearly, though not exactly, equal in time; 
a practice they have pursued on other occasions. 
From this part of the poem, in which he is tracing 
the use of the different sorts of poetry among the 
Greeks, and from the mention of Archilochus, who 
was also a Greek writer, it is plain that the whole 
passage must be considered as referring only to 
the Greek, and not the Latin Tragic and Comic 
Poets: and it has been before noticed, that the use 
of Iambic, by the Greek Comic poets, is, to say 
the least of it, extremely doubtful. He speaks of 
the Iambus as a proper foot to express rage, and 
yet as calculated for dialogue or common conver- 
sation, and for the transaction of business — two 
purposes perfectly opposite and contradictory: 
and he has evidently confounded together, the two 
separate and distinct ideas of a musical cadence and 
loudness of sound, when he attributes, as he does, 
to the Iambic foot, the power of overcoming the 
popular clamour in a theatre. A quality like this, 
no Metre can ever possess : for, in such a clamour, 
not one word that was spoken could be heard; nor 
could any one single voice, however strong, be ca- 
pable of uttering a sound that could be distin- 
guished. The only mode of silencing such a tu- 
mult, would be, by the united power of all the 
musical instruments ; and when the band of in- 
strumental performers in the Orchestra had, in 
the course of the representation, occasion to play, 
the voices of the tumultuous audience would be 


drowned and lost in the louder and more powerful 
sound of their instruments, as daily happens in 
the modern theatres of this and other countries. 

In the second passage, which occurs, v. 251, of 
the same poem, the lines are these : 

* Syllaba longa, brevi subjecta, vocatur Iambus : 
' Pes citus ; uncle etiam Trimetros accrescere jussit. 

* Nomen Iambaeis, cum senos redderet ictus. 

' Primus ad extremura similis sibi, non ita pridem, 

* Tardior ut paulo, graviorque veniret ad aures, 
' Spondees stabiles in jura paterna recepit 

4 Commodus, et patiens: non ut de sede secunda 

* Cederet, aut quarta socialiter. Hie et in Acci 
1 Nobilibus Trimetris apparet rarus, et Enni. 

* In scenam missos magno cum pondere versus, 

* Aut opera celeris nimium, curaque carentis, 
' Aut ignoratse premit artis crimine turpi. 

* Non quivis videt immodulata poemata judex : 

* Et data Romanis venia est indigna poetis. 

' Idcircone vager, scribamque licenter ? an omnes 

* Visuros peccata putem mea ? tutus, et intra 

* Spem venise cautus, vitavi denique culpam : 

* Non laudem merui. Vos exemplaria Grseca 

* Nocturna versate manu, versate diurna. 

4 At nostri proavi Plautinos et numeros, et 

* Laudavere sales, nimium patienter utrumque, 
4 Ne dicam stulte mirati: si modo ego, et vos 

* Seimus inurbanum Jepido seponere dicto : 

* Legitimumque sonum digitis calleraus et aure.' 

Horace here speaks of no other than Trimeter 
Iambic, which, he says, at first consisted wholly 
of the Iambus ; but that, afterwards, Spondees 
were introduced, though not in the second or 


fourth place ; and for this last rule he cites the 
authority of the Trimeters of Accius and Ennius, 
in which as he seems to say, though the mode of 
expression is not clear, the introduction of the 
Spondee was but rare. 

From the mention of Accius and Ennius, who 
appear to have been principally Tragic writers, it 
should seem, that what is here said, as to Iambic 
verse, relates only to Latin Tragedy, as to which, 
however, for the reasons already assigned in Sec- 
tions XIX. and XX. and elsewhere in this work, 
it is highly improbable his opinion could have 
been correct. Although he has, a few lines below 5 
censured those who had commended the versifica- 
tion and witticisms of Plautus, he has no where 
said of what kind Comic Metre really was ; and 
this, at the very time when lie professes to teach 
the Art of Poetry. But it is plain that the system 
which he has, certainly without sufficient ground, 
mentioned, as used by the Tragic writers, and con- 
fining it solely to Trimeter verses, in length, and to 
the Iambus and Spondee, as the constituent feet, 
cannot possibly be applied to the works of the 
Comic writers, as at present regulated. This fact 
Priscian has decidedly admitted when he speaks 
of the Comic authors, and particularly Terence, 
as using Iambic Trimeter and Tetrameter c , Tro- 

c i Ergo Trimetris et Tetrametris frequenter utuntur Comici, 
aliis vero raro, et in medio dispersis Rhythmics causa et dis- 
tinctions. '-—Priscian, edit. Putsch, col. 1319. 


chaic Tetrameter d , and a mixture of both e , and 
as introducing" into their verses five sorts of feet f . 
Priscian's system, it is true, has been shown to be 
objectionable, as requiring variety of length in the 
verses, and Poetical Licences £ ; but still it is evi- 
dent, from his own conduct, that he could not 
make so contracted a scheme, as this of Horace 
would prove, in any way successful. What might 
have been the opinion of Horace, on the subject 
of Latin Comic metre, had he declared it, which 
he seems not to have done, is a matter of very 
small moment ; for, how could he be considered 
as a competent judge, who confesses himself, as he 
does, unable to perceive, in the versification of 
Plautus, that merit, for which it had been com- 
mended by others ? 

In the course of the preceding Sections, it 
has been shown, that Comedy was always con- 
sidered as having had, in its original, some con- 

d * Trochaicis etiam utuntur, plerunque Tetrametris cata- 

* lecticis, i. quibus una deest syllaba in fine.' — Priscian, edit. 
Putsch, col. 1321. 

e ? Terentius Trochaico mixto, vel confuso, cum Iambico, 

* utitur in sermone personarum, quibus maxime imperitior hie 
' convenit.' — Ibid. col. 1326. 

f ' Comcediae veteris Latinae scriptores eodem Metri modo 
' Iambico sint usi, lit omnibus in locis indifferenter ponerent 
' quinque pedes, id est, Iambum, vel Tribrach urn, vel Anapaes- 
c turn, vel Dactylum, vel Spondeum ; absque postremo loco, in 
' quo vel Iambum vel Pyrrhichium, omnino posuisse iuveniun- 
< tur.'— Ibid, col. 1319. 

« See Section XXII. 


nexion with the rites of Bacchus h ; that it was* 
consequently, represented at Athens during the 
continuance of the feasts of Bacchus [ ; and that, 
at Rome, this relation was so far acknowledged, 
that, during the performance of a Comedy, an al- 
tar to Bacchus was placed on the stage k . As this 
relation was thus, in both instances, decidedly ac- 
knowledged, it was surely much more natural, 
that, when it was determined such compositions 
should be in verse, that kind of verse appropriated 
to Bacchus, should be employed, in preference to 
any other ; and Aristotle, though he mentions a 
change in that respect, as to Tragedy \ notices no 
such as to Comedy. Now, Iambic verse never had, 
or could have, any concern with Bacchus ; nor has 
any such connexion ever been pretended, by the 
most sanguine advocates for the idea, that Comic 
verse is Iambic. On the contrary, Bacchiac, or 
Pseonic verse, is known to have been used in the 
hymns in his honour m ; and it is equally certain 
that, from this appropriation, the Bacchiac foot 
had its name n . It is further observable, that 
what have hitherto passed as Iambic Trimeter 
verses, will, as has appeared, scan as Bacchiac or 

h See Section XIL * Ibid. 

k Ibid. l Ibid. 

m Diomedes, col. 475. See the passage already given in a 
note on Section VI. 

n See a passage from Diomedes, col. 475; another from Vie- 
torinus, col. 2487 ; and a third from Plotius, col. 2626; all given 
in a note on Section VI. 


Pseonic Tetrameters ° ; and that both Plautus and 
Terence have decidedly used verses, consisting, in 
some instances, wholly of the Bacchius ; in others, 
of none but the Cretic R ; and these have been ac- 
knowledged, both by Bentley * and Hare r , to be 
of those sorts. If some are unquestionably of 
those kinds, why may not all be so ? because, as 
may be seen from examples, it is equally possible 
to reduce even those lines which at present are 
given as longer, to the very same length \ Regu- 
larity of verse, indeed, throughout a whole dra- 
matic performance, but certainly throughout the 
same scene, at least, is entirely consonant, and its 
opposite as clearly contrary, to all reason K The 
practice, therefore, of dividing scenes into verses 
of various lengths, the necessity of which is con- 
tended for by the Grammarians and Critics, can 
never be justified ; nor does it, either from the ex- 
amples already produced from the Greek writers % 
or from any other instances which have yet been 
found, appear to have ever prevailed among them. 
After a due consideration of these facts, and 

° See Section XX. 

p Plautus, Casina, Act III. Sc. 5. Terence, Andria, Act 
III. Sc.2; Act IV. Sc. 1. 

i See his ' Emendationes ad Ciceronis Tusculanas,' inserted 
at the end of Ciceronis Tusc. Disputat. a Davisio, Cantab. 1709, 
p. 49 & p. 53, before referred to. 

r See his edition of Terence, p. 31 and 41. 

9 See Section XXIX. * See Section XVIII, 

n See Sectien XX. 

G G 


the strong objections before urged in Section XIX. 
and XX. against the supposition that even Greek 
Comic verse was Iambic, the opinion of Horace, 
as stated above, and particularly in the very loose 
manner in which he has delivered it, is surely en- 
titled to no more respect than the sentiments of 
Pope, on a passage in Shakespear. They both 
lived at a great distance from the time of the ori- 
ginal authors, and had evidently no more means 
of information on the subject, than what a mere 
inspection of the text afforded. What they have 
both said, amounts, most evidently, to nothing 
more than mere conjecture, against which, strong 
facts may be opposed. On the whole, therefore, 
there does not seem the smallest ground for sup- 
posing, either Greek or Latin Comic verse, Iam- 
bic ; and, if this is not already sufficiently shown, 
in the case of the Latin, to satisfy all candid, un- 
prejudiced, and judicious persons, as it is conceived 
it ought to do, it is yet imagined, that few will be 
inclined to contend for the contrary position, after 
they shall have read what they will find stated on 
the subject, in the course of the next ensuing Sec- 




Latin Comic Metre really Saturnian or Bacchiac, 

Paul Merula's note, in his Commentary on Ennius, shows the 
use and introduction of Saturnian verse. — Observations on 
it. — Nature of Saturnian verse, described by Terentianus 
Maurus— by Fortunatianus — by Victorinus — by Diomedes. 
—Every reason to think Saturnian Bacchiac. — Diomedes, 
his definition of the Antibacchius.— Specimens of Saturnian 
verse. — Bentley has ascertained Bacchiac and Cretic verses 
in Plautus and Terence. — New regulation necessary for re- 
ducing verses all to one length. — Bentley has new regulated 
a scene in Plautus. — Cretic or Pseonic verses in Terence. — ■ 
Why may not all be so ?— Some in Plautus's Amphitruo.— 
New regulation of part of the Amphitruo, Act I. Sc. 1 . — • 
Terence's Andria, Act I. Sc. f, new regulated also. — New 
arrangement necessary, Andria, Act I. Sc. 5. — An instance 
to support it. 

Paul Hernia, in one of his notes, in Lis Commen- 
tary on the Annals of Ennius x , expressly asserts. 

x See his edition of Ennius's Annals, published in 4to. at 
Leyden, 1595. In his Commentary, p. Ixxxviii. he uses these 
words : ' Certe, pauilo ante Ennium, in Comcediis et Tragcediis, 

* quas Poetee Latini vel interpretabantur, vel novas faciebant, 

* Graecorum videntur leges, non tamen stricte, sequuti. Heroiun 
c et magnorum virorum gesta, ab Grascis scripta, vorsa interpre- 

* tatione vulgabant, ab se noviter inventa, novo versuum genere, 
' Saturnio plurimum, prodebant. Testantur quae dixi Livl An- 

G G 2 


that, shortly before the time of Ennius, the Latin 
writers, in translating' into Latin, from the Greeky 
the actions of great and illustrious men, as de- 
scribed by the Greeks in their writings, employed 
a new sort of verse, lately invented by themselves, 
called Saturnian verse >'. He adds, further, that 

* dronici, Cn. Naavl, posteriorum quoque Comcediae et Tragcediae, 
' quae ad Graecorum exemplum, Iambis et Trochaeis, Dimetris, 

* Trimetris, et Tetrametris, Brachycatalectis, Catalectis, Acata- 

* lectis, et Hypercatalectis, maxime decurrunt. Idem Livius 
' Odysseam, ab Homero Heroico carmine scriptam, ut et ab La- 

* tinis legeretur prorsa oratione, mistis ubique Saturniis, ali- 

* quando Iambis, expo-suit.' Further on he says, ' Naevium Sa~ 

* turriio carmine bellum Punicum exposuisse scribit Festus, lib. 

* xvrii. " Versus quoque antiquissimi," * inquit,' " quibus Faunus 
" fata cecinisse hominibus videtur, Saturnii appellantur, quibus 
" et a Naevio bellum Punicum scriptum est, et a multis alia plura 
" composita sunt." Sic M. Terentius Varro, libro vi. de L. L* 

" Versibu*, quos olim Fauni vatesque canebant." 

" Fauni, dei Latinorum, ita ut Faunus, et Fauna, sint in versi- 
w bus, quos vocant Saturnios, in silvestribus locis traditum est, 
il soli'tos fari, a quo Fando, Faunos dictos." 

What Merula has said above, as to the imitation of the cus- 
toms of the Greek Poets by the Latin ones, is evidently spoken 
at random. He has produced no instances ; and the fact, that 
the Greeks used in their Comedies the varieties of Metre which 
he has attributed to them, stands contradicted directly by the 
specimens inserted in Section XX. from the writings of Eupolis, 
Cratinus, Aristophanes, Menander, and Philemon. When the 
Latin writers, in translating from Greek Poems in Heroic verse, 
such as the Odyssey, could deviate, as they have done, by 
using a different kind of verse, Saturnian, why is it to be sup- 
posed they would more scrupulously have followed, in dramatic 
compositions, the practice of the Greeks ? 

y Merula is certainly mistaken, in supposing Saturnian 
verse the invention of the Italians. Fortunatianus, edit. Putsch 


Livius Andronicus, who, it is to be observed, was 
the introducer of Comedy, at Rome % translated 
the Odyssey of Homer from the Greek verse into 
Latin prose, into which he intermixed Saturnian 
verses, and sometimes Iambic ; and Festus, lib. 
xviii. relates, that Nsevius, who was also another 
Comic writer, composed a poem on the Punic 
war, in Saturnian verse, in which measure, many 

col. 2679, says, * De Saturnio versu dicendum est, quern nostri 

* existimaverunt proprium esse Italicse regioni, sed falluntur. A 

* Graecis enim varie et multis modis tractatus est, non solum a 
' Comicis, sed etiam a Tragicis.' — « Et quoniam, sub oecasione 

* versus hujus, se tempestiva etiam nobis alia suggerit species, 
' consentaneum reor hoc loco dicere de natura et origine hujus 

* versus, cui prisca apud Latinos astas, tanquam Italo et indi- 

* genae, Saturnio sive Faunio nomen dedit ; sed falluntur, a 

* Graecis enim varie et multiformiter inductus est, nee tantum a 
' Comicis, sed etiam a Tragicis.' Victorinus, edit. Putsch, col. 
2586, speaking * De Saturnio Versu,' in an express section on 
that subject. And Terentianus Maurus says thus, to the same 
effect : 

' De Saturnio carmine. 

* Aptum videtur esse 

' Nunc hoc loco moncre, 

* Quae sit figura versus, 

* Queni credidit vetustas 

* (Tanquam Italis repertuci) 

* Saturnium vocandum. 

* Sed est oiigo Graeca, 
' Illique metron istud 

1 Certo modo dederunt . 
' Nostrique mox poetaj 
' Rudem sonum secuti, 
' Ut quseque res ferebat, 
' Sic disparis figurae 
' Versus vagos locabant/ 

Terentianus Maurus, col. 24-3.9. 
See Section XII. 

G G 3 


other authors, also, produced poetical composi- 

Every reason concurs for supposing that Sa- 
turnian Metre was, in fact, no other than Bacchiac 
or Pseonic. Some writers, it is true, call it Iam- 
bic hypercatalectic b ; but, admitting any idea of 
such an excess, as a verse one syllable too long, is 
a bad system. Diomedes, apud Putsch, col. 475, 
after speaking of the Bacchius, which he describes 
as consisting of one short syllable and two long, 
and as used by the Bacchants, says, ' Huic con- 
6 trarius est Palimbacchius Latius, qui & Saturnius, 
c ultima brevi, quam quidam Proponticon, alii 
' Thessaleon, vocant c .' The Antibacchius per- 

b Diomedes, edit. Putsch, col. 512, says, * Saturnium, in 
' honorem Dei, N?evius invenit, addita una syllaba ad Iambicum 
' versum, sic 

* Summas opes qui regum regius refregit.' 

' Huic si demas ultimam syllabam, erit Iambicus, de quo saepe 
' memoratum est.' 

c Diomedes, apud Putsch, col. 475. Fortunatianus, edit. 
Putsch, col. 2678, says, ' Phalaecius versus ex duplici pede con- 
' stat, quern Bacchion musici, Choriambon grammatici, vocant : 

* habet longam et duas breves et longam, i. Trochaeum et Iam- 

* bum. Hoc autem Phalaecus conscripsit hymnos Cereri et Li- 

* bero, tali genere Metri, quod scilicet est deorum 

' convenire venerationi credidit.' — The Bacchius and Choriam- 
bus are certainly not the same foot, but they both occur in the 
Paeonic kind of verse ; so that they may, so far, be reckoned of 
the same species. And, on the principle of Proportion, before 
noticed as being the only proper characteristic, it would be no 
difficult matter to show that Bacchiac and Choriambic were the 
same kinds of metre. 


petually occurs in the Bacchiac, or Pseonic; and 
in all probability was, from the fact just men- 
tioned, the principal foot in the Saturn ian verse 
All equivalent feet, and even the Molossus and 
Choriambus, and the rest similar to them, were 
no doubt admitted into this as well as into other 
kinds of verse ; and the several specimens of Sa- 
turnian verse given by the grammarians may all 
be scanned as Bacchiac, in the following man- 

Isis perlerrat orjbem crini|bus profusis d 

Sumroas olpes regum | regias | refregit 6 

Naevio | poetae | sic ferunt | Metellos f 

Si vocet | Camcenas | quis novem | sorores^ 

Quum saepe | Isederenjtur esse com'minatos h 

Ferunt pulichras cratejras aurejas lepistas ' 

Dabunt malum ) Metelli | Naevio | poets k 

Novem Jovis j Concordes | filiae | sorores l 

Cum victor I Lemno claslsem Doricam ap!pulisset m 

* Servius, edit. Putsch. 1825, 

e Diomedes, edit. Putsch, col. 512. Fortunatianus, edit. 
Putsch, col. 2698. The latter, speaking of Saturnian verse, 
says, ■ Maxime tamen triumphaturi in Capitolio tabulas hujus* 
1 modi versus incidebant ;' and he then gives this verse as a 

f Terent. Maur. edit. Putsch, col. 24-39. 

s Terent. Maur. col. 2439. Victorinus, col. 2587 ; but he 
reads, * Jam nunc vocet Camcenas,' 

h Terent. Maur. col. 24-39. 

1 Plotius, edit. Putsch, col. 2650. Fortunatianus, col. 2680; 
but the latter reads it, * aureas lepidas.' Victorinus, col. 2587; 
he reads * aureasque Jepistas.' 

k Terent. Maur. col. 2439. Fortunatianus, col. 2698, 

1 Fortunatianus, col. 2680. Victorinus, col. 2587, 

m Victorinus, col. 2587. 

<*<* 4 


Turdis e|dacibus | comparas | amice a 
Malum dabunt | Metelli | Naevio | poetae° 
Quem non rati!onis egen|tem vicit | Archimenes* 
Fato Ro[mae fiunt | Metelli | consules^ 
Consulto producit eura quo sit impudentior 1 " 
Duello magno dirimendo regibus subigendis s 
Fundit fugat prosternit maximas legiones * 
Quid immerenjtibus noces | quid invides J amicis u 

B Fortunatianus, col. 2680. He adds, ' Apud Euripidem 

* et Callimachurn inveni tale genus;' and then gives this ex- 
ample. Victorious, col. apud Putsch. 2587. 

Plotius, col. 2650. Fortunatianus, col. 2680. Victor!- 
nus, 2587. 

p Fortunatianus, col. 2680. He adds, ' Apud Archilochum 

* tale' (sc. genus inveni), and then gives this. 

i Merula, in his Commentary on Ennius's Annals, p. Ixxxviii. 
before referred to, cites this from Paedianus in II. Verrinam, 
apparently as a Saturnian verse ; and says it is an hypercatalec- 
tic Senarius, or Trimeter: but in this last fact he is mistaken as 
to both points. 

r Fortunatianus, col. 2680. He says, ' Et tertium genus 

' Consulto producit eum quo sit impudentior 

* Apud nostros autem in Tabulis antiquis,quas triumphaturi duces 

* in Capitolio figebant, victoriaeque suae titulum, Saturniis versi- 

* bus, prosequebantur talia repperi exempla. ex Regili Tabula t 

' Duello magno dirimendo, regibus subigendis, 

* qui est subsimilis ei, quem paulo ante posui, 

* Consulto producit eum quo sit impudentior, 

* in Accilii Glabrionis tabula, 

* Fundit fugat prosternit maximas legiones.' 
8 Fortunatianus, col. 2680. * Ibid. 

u Ibid. Of the whole list above given, consisting of seven- 
teen in number, only three are not capable of reduction into 
Tetrameters, but would be one syllable too long. Of these three, 
the first may be rendered Bacchiac merely by reading est in- 
stead of sit, thus : 

Consulto | producit ejum quo est imjpudentior. 

And the rest by transposing the words thus: 

Duello di|rimendo mag|no subigen|tJis regibus 
Fundit fujgat prostei jnit legiojnes maximas, 


When Merula speaks of the intermixture of 
Saturnian verse with Iambic, he seems not to have 
been aware, as is however the fact, that verses 
apparently Iambic may very frequently be scan- 
ned as Bacchiac or Pseonic. This fact has been 
shown in a former Section x , and Bacchiac or 
Pseonic is plainly demonstrated, from the instances 
just given, to be the same as Saturnian. The 
Iambic lines which he mentions, were therefore, 
probably, like the rest, Saturnian, and the verses 
were consequently, in all likelihood, all of the 
same kind. 

If the Latin poets, and those Comic writers 
also, were so attached to Saturnian verse, as to 
prefer it, as they certainly did on these occasions, 
to Heroic Hexameter, in which their originals 
were written, it is at least equally probable, that 
they should have introduced it into original com- 
positions for the stage. Accordingly Bentley has 
discovered and ascertained instances of the use of 
Bacchiac and Cretic, or Pseonic, which are all, in 
reality, the same with each other, and also with 
Saturnian, both in the writings of Plautus and 
Terence. These, with some others which he has 
given, may be seen in his c Emendationes ad Cice- 
' ronis Tusculanas,' inserted at the end of i Cice- 
6 ronis Tusculanarum Disputationum Libri v. ex 
€ recensione Joannis Davisii, Coll. Regin. Socii. 

* See Section XX. and XXL 


' 8vo. Cantab. 1709, p. 49;' and such of them as 
he has taken from Plautus or Terence, have al- 
ready been inserted in Section XXI. Bentley is 
however mistaken in considering Bacchiac and 
Cretic as distinct sorts ; for it is evident, from his 
own examples, when scanned as they ought to be, 
without Licences, that they are the same, and that 
the Bacchius and Cretic often occur in the same 

As to any new regulation, necessary for redu- 
cing the verses in the Latin Comic writers ail to one 
length, the present division is evidently so irregu- 
lar, and the varieties, observable in the manu- 
scripts and early printed editions, so great, as to 
justify any attempt for a new arrangement, found- 
ed, as this would also be, on the strict rules of 
Prosodia and Reason, the only sure guides for 
such a purpose. Nay, the very proposed 
change in distribution is in many cases actually 
suggested by the old copies themselves ; for it is 
observable, that in several instances the old copies 
vary from the present editions, in the mode of 
disposing the verses, at the beginning of scenes 
particularly, and that they give the verses, in 
those places, exactly as they would be required to 
stand, in a new arrangement, conducted on the 
above principles. This, although they soon after 
fall into confusion, is surely an adequate rule for 
settling the division of the rest of the scene, sub- 
ject, however, to the control of the rules of Pro- 
sodia* Bentley, in the case of some verses at the 


beginning of Act III. Sc. 5, in Plautus's Casina, 
which had formerly stood as Tetrameters, thus>: 

* Nulla sum, nulla sum, tota tota occidi, cor metu mortuum est, 
€ Membra miserae tremunt : nescio unde auxilii, praesidii, 

* Perfugii mihi, aut opum copiam comparem, aut expetam, 

* Tanta factis modo mira miris modis intus vidi, 

* Novam atque integram audaciam. Cave tibi Cleostrata, abscede 

* Ab ista obsecro, ne quid in te male faxit ira percita, 

found it necessary to new regulate and divide 
them thus : 

Nulla sum [ nulla sum | tota to|ta occidi 

Cor metu | mortuum est | membra misejrae tremunt 

Nescio un|de auxilii | praesidii | perfugii 

Mihi aut opum | copiam J comparem aut J expetam z 

Tanta fac|tis modo | mira mijris modis 

Intus vi|di novam atlque integram au|daciam a 

Cave tibi J Cleostrata ablscede ab isjta obsecro b 

y See Lambin's edition of Plautus. 

z Bentley reads and scans these verses thus : 

* Nescio unjde auxili J przesidi | perfugi 

* Mi aut opum | copiam | comparem aut | expetam ;' 

but the Licences are unnecessary ; for this sort clearly admits 
the Choriambus, as the three last feet certainly are in the first 
verse ; and the Di-Iambus, which is the first foot, in the second. 

a Bentley, in the first foot of this verse, supposes an elision 
of the S, at the end of Intus, for the purpose of rendering that 
foot a Cretic : but, as the Molossus is undoubtedly admissible, 
his conjecture is unnecessary. 

b Plauti Casina, Act III. Sc. 5, and Bentley 's ' Emenda- 
* tiones ad Ciceronis Tusculanas,' p. 53, before referred to. 
This is one of the places where a different regulation of the 
verses, at least, from that in which they appear in some edi- 
tions, has been found necessary. Bentley is evidently right, in 


and no one, from their very appearance, can doubt 
one moment whether he was right. A similar 
advantage, by a change of this kind, might also 
be gained, in a multitude of other places, in the 
works of Plautus and Terence ; and the success, 
which has uniformly attended experiments, actu- 
ally made on the present occasion on several of 
these, is sufficient to justify a firm persuasion, that 
the system by which those experiments were 
guided, is in every respect well founded. 

Terence has, in his Andria, Act III. Sc. 2, in- 
troduced four Bacchiac verses, which have been 
already given in Section XXI. and are acknow- 
ledged both by Bentley b and Bishop Hare c to be 
of that sort ; and in Act IV. Sc. 1, of the same 
play, he has used a few Cretic verses, which have 
been also noticed in the same Section XXI. and 
are in like manner decided by Bentley d and Bishop 
Hare e to be Cretic : but these two scenes are the 
only places throughout his whole works, in which 
Terence is, at present, supposed to have em- 
ployed lines of either of those kinds. It is, how- 

thus arranging them ; but, in Lambin's edition of Plautus, the 
lines stand as before observed in the text. The fact is only here 
noticed to show, that the distribution of the lines of a passage, 
m any edition, ie not a sufficient reason against attempting a 

b See his ' Enaendationes ad Ciceronis Tusculanas,* p. 49, 
before referred to. 

c See his edition of Terence, p. 31. 

d See his * Emendationes ad Ciceronis Tusculanas,' p. 53 r 
before referred to. 

* See his edition of Terence, p. 41. 


ever, exceedingly improbable, that, on these oc- 
casions only, he should have resorted to them. If 
these are, as they indubitably are, unquestionable 
instances, it follows, that all the succeeding 
verses in the same scenes are Paeonic likewise ; for 
the principle of uniformity of verse in the same 
scene, seems incontrovertible by any argument of 
weight. There is no doubt, from what has been 
already found on trial, that, on a similar experi- 
ment, they would all be found of the same sort, 
and capable of reduction to the same length; as 
in reason and good sense they should be : and if 
the succeeding verses in those scenes will scan as 
such, why may not other scenes be also so scan- 
ned and divided as to length ? 

The same may be said of the initial and final, 
and the other long verses, in the first scene of 
Plautus's Amphitruo, which, situated as they are, 
intermixed with Peeonic Tetrameters, ought them- 
selves to be considered as of the same kind, and 
divided and regulated accordingly. Some of the 
Paeonic Tetrameters here mentioned, beginning 
' Hoec heri,' &c. will be found in Section XXL; and 
the possibility of reducing the long verses, which 
precede them, to the same standard, will be evi- 
dent, from the following attempt on the initial 
lines of the first scene of the Amphitruo, which, 
in consequence of being thus disposed, exactly 
connect and correspond with the before-men- 
tioned Bacchiac Tetrameters, immediately follow- 
ing them. 


Qui me nunc ] alter est J audacijor homo auf 
Qui confldentior | juventu|tis mores 
Qui sciam | qui hoc noctis | solus am|bulem 
Quid faciam | nunc si tres j viri me in | carcerera 
Compege|rint inde qua|si e promptularia 
Cella delpromar ad flalgrum nee caujsam liceat 
Dicere mijhi neque in hero | quicquam auxijlii siet 
Nee quisquam | sit quin me omjnes esse | dignura 
Deputent | ita quasi in[cudem me | miserum 
Homines oclto validi | caedant i]ta peregre 
Adveniens | hospitio | publicitus [ accipiar 
Haec heri, &c* 

By a similar regulation, on the like principles, 
all the irregularities of Metre, in the same scene, 
which occur in Terence's Andria, Act I. Sc. 2, 
may be prevented ; and the whole be reduced, as 
it is in the following attempt, to an equal length 
of verse, without one Poetical Licence. Variety of 
verse, in the same scene, as has been often before 
noticed, does not seem justified by the practice of 
the Greeks, and indeed it is so irrational, that it 
is, perhaps, scarcely possible to defend it. 

Non dubium est | quin uxoirem nolit | Alius 
Ita Davum | modo timeire sensi ubi | nuptias 
Futuras j esse audijvit sed ipjse exit foras 
Mirabar | hoc si sic j abiret et | heri 
Semper le|nitas verejbar quorsum elvaderet 
Qui postquam aujdierat non [ datum iri j filio 

f In the line, as here given, a variation has been made from 
the common reading, by the insertion of the word ' nunc/ 
which does not occur in Lambin's edition, but is to be found m 
the folio edition of Plautus, printed at Parma in 1510. 


Uxorem | suo nunjquam cuiquam | nostrum 

Verbum fe|cit neque id selgre tulit at | nunc faciet 

Neque ut opi|nor sine tu|o magno | malo 

Id voluit | nos sic nee | opinanltes duci 

Falso gauldio spe|rantes jam a|moto metu 

Inter oscijtantes oplprimi ut ne es|set spatium 

Cogitan|di ad disturjbandas nup|tias 

Astute | carnife^t | quag loquitur | herus est 

Neque provi|deram Dave hem quid est | ehodum 

Ad me quid | hie volt quid a!is qua de | re rogas 

Meum gna|tum rumor | est ama|re id populus 

Curat sciilicet haeccijne agis annon [ ego 

Vero istuc j sed nunc e|a me exquilrere 

Iniqui | patris est nam | quod antehac | fecit nihil 

Ad me atti|net dum tem'pus ad earn } rem tulit 

Sivi animum ut | expleret | suum nunc j hie dies 

Aliam vi'tam adfert ali'os mores | postulat 

Dehinc pos|tulo sijve aequum est te o|ro Dave 

Ut redeat I jam in viam hoc | quod sit om|nes qui amant 

Graviter sijbi dari uxolrem ferunt | ita aiunt 

Turn si quis | magistrum j cepit ad e|ara rem improbum 

Ipsum animum aelgrotum ad de|teriprem | partem 

Plerumque aplplicat non | hercle intellligo 

Non hem Non | Davus sum [ non CEdilpus 

Nempe ergo ajperte vis | quae restant j me loqui 

Sane qui|dem si sen|sero hodie | quicquam 

In his te j nuptiis | fallacijae 

Conari | quo fiant | minus aut vel|le in ea re 

Ostendere | quam sis calllidus verjberibus 

Caesum te in | pistrinum | Dave dejdam usque ad necera 

Ea leige atque omi|ne ut si te in|de eximerim 

Ego pro | te molam | quid hoc injtellextin 

An nondum eitiam ne hoc | quidem uno j callide 

Ita aperte ipjsam rem mojdo locutus | nihil 

Circuitijone usus es | ubi vis fajcilius 

Passus sum J quam in hac re | me delujdier 

Bona verba J quseso irriides nihil | me fallis 


Sed dico | tibi ne te'mere faci|as neque 
Tu haud dicas | tibi non | praedictum | cave 

The necessity of a new arrangement may also fur- 
ther appear from the following instance : Terence, 
in his Andria, Act V. Sc. 1, gives this line, which 

is said by the Grammarians to be Trochaic Tetra- 


meter catalectic : 

• Satis jam | satis Si|mo specltata erjga te a|miciti'a est me|aC 

But to make it so, it is necessary to introduce two 
Poetical Licences in the scanning ; one in the first 
foot, and the other in the second, by making in 
each the last syllable of 6 satis' short, though na- 
turally long by position, as it there stands. Poe- 
tical Licences are always to be avoided, and it is, 
for that reason, much better that the line should 
be new regulated, thus : 

* Satis jam satis Simo spectata erga te.* 

So it actually stands, in a manuscript of the four- 
teenth century h , which probably is not the only 
one which gives that distribution. It will then 
scan as follows : 

' Satis jam | satis Sl[mo spectajta erga te ;' 

and be exactly a copy, as to structure of versifica- 
tion, of the following line, in the Amphitruo of 

§ See it so termed Trochaic Tetram. cat. in Hare's edition, 
p. 5.1, and scanned with the two Licences as here, 
h Harleian MSS. No. 2525, 


Plautus, Act II. Sc. 2, which stands as a distinct 
line in Lambin's edition, as it does also in Gro- 
novius's edit. Arnst. 1684 : 

* Satin pariva res est | yolupta|tum In vita.' 

Lambin, indeed, in the second foot, reads, c parva 
c est res/ instead of c parya res est ;* but Gro- 
novius gives it c parva res est.' The variation 
which this occasions, by introducing a Molossus, 
instead of aBacchius, in the second foot, is no ob- 
jection; because the Molossus is an admissible 
foot in that species : but other copies give it as 
■ parva res est,' which makes Terence's line a per- 
fect resemblance. 

One single breach of any one of the rules of 
Prosodia, is evidently a much more violent method, 
to correct or justify the text of an author, than 
merely a new regulation and distribution of his 
lines is, to remove manifest corruptions, in the 
arrangement of his verses. Not to mention, be- 
sides, that in many cases the proposed alterations 
are suggested, from a comparison of manuscripts, 
and, in others, are actually confirmed and jus-* 
tified by their authority. The former method is 
plainly a transgression against those rules which 
were established to promote general excellence, 
and intended for universal influence, while the 
latter only affects that single instance to which it 
is applied, and the works of that author alone. 
Besides, that it tends to vindicate his reputation, 

H H 


as a Poet, from the implied charge of incapacity, 
want of genius, and deficiency of talent, to which 
he cannot but be liable, when he is found, or 
supposed, unable to submit to the usual and or- 
dinary restrictions of settled and established rules. 



Bacchiac or Saturnian Verse admits all equivalent 
Feet, but no Licences. 

Feet actually occurring in the Paeonic or Bacchiac verses, in 
Plautus and Terence. — All equivalent feet equally admis- 
sible on principle. — The want of an actual instance no ob- 
jection to this. 

The specimens of verses already inserted from 
Plautus and Terence, in Section XXI. have de- 
cidedly shown the use of the following kinds of 
Feet or Metres: 

Bacchius «> - » Molossus --- 

Antibacchius *• - y Di-Iambus w-w. 

Cretic V, -^- Iambus & Tribrachys ^-w«« 

Paeon 1 -wwu Ionicus Minor « w - - 

Paeon 4 u^w- Anapaest & Pyrrhi-7 

r v w _ v w 

Paeon 3 


PaeonS,... *-wu Tribrachys & Iambus ww«*. 

Di-Trochee .. --* 

Choriambus _ ^ w .. 

Trochee & Tribrachys - « w w ^ 
Ionicus Major. • - - « ^ 

This any one may perceive who will take the 
trouble to examine the verses, and extract the 
Feet, or Metres, of which they consist, as has 

II H 2 


been done on the present occasion; and as those 
above enumerated, amount to so nearly all that 
can be produced from the fundamental Feet or 
Metres, either by changing" the situations of the 
quantities, or substituting one long syllable for 
two short, they certainly justify the supposition, 
that every one of the rest might be equally re- 
ceived, because they all depend on the same 
principle, though an actual instance of the use of 
some of them has not happened to be found. 
This circumstance has been noticed before; and 
the difficulty of producing, when it is wanted, an 
actual example even of a common and acknow- 
ledged rule has been shown so great', as to afford 
no rational ground for rejecting an instance 
merely for want of an example to confirm it, if 
the principle on which it rests be in itself reason- 

All in the above list, it is to be observed, have 
been produced without one single Poetical Licence, 
and without ever departing from the principle of 
equality of length in the verses. 

1 See a note on Section X. p. 132. 



Pindar's and Horaces Odes to be new regulated. 

A new regulation of Metre necessary to other Poets besides the 
Comic. — An Ode of Pindar, as it now stands. — Objections 
to it. — The same, fresh arranged, as Bacchiac. — An Ode of 
Horace, arranged in like manner — Another Ode so treated, 
— Reasons for the present irregularity. 

I he want of a new and more correct regulation 
and arrangement, is not, however, peculiar to 
Comic Metre ; for nothing* can be in greater con- 
fusion than the Lyric Metre, or the Lyric compo- 
sitions, as well of the Greek as the Roman Poets. 
It is true this inquiry is, perhaps, not strictly 
within the compass or limits of the present work, 
but yet it will be found, on examination, more 
closely connected with its object than may at first 
sight be imagined. At least it certainly tends to 
show, that the present regulation of the verses is 
in almost all kinds of Poetry extremely erroneous; 
and, consequently, that a proposal for a new ar- 
rangement and distribution, in the case of Comic 
verse, is not so violent or unnecessary a measure 
as some may, perhaps, endeavour to represent it. 
But, in addition to this, it is also a subject of so 
much importance in itself, to the knowledge of 

H H 3 


Prosodia and Versification in general, that it 
would perhaps be wrong to omit it. 

As a proof of the great corruptions of these 
Poems, as to the regulation of the verses, in the 
instance of the Greek writers, the reader has only 
to examine the first Ode of the Olympiad of 
Pindar, in which the lines are disposed as follow; 

i Aoigov jjih v^oup o os 

4 %$ V(r0 $> OtSSoftAVOV Tl'VQ 
i d Tc tlOiTTOSTTSL VV- 

s KTi, peyavooog s^oyjx ttXs.t^ 

* si V ocsQXix yocpvsv 
i eKSsai (piKov TjTop 7 

* jAVJXsS G&Sx crX.Q7TcL 

* uKho 6aK7TV0TSp0V 

i ev cIllsgk (pwsivov CtgpC'J 

* hypug §/' ccl9epog, 

' p?S' OXv^iriczg dywa. 
6 (psprsgov ocv^uctoulsv. 
4 oSsv o 7roXv(poi7og 
s vpvog otptpi&aXXsTXi 
t trotyMv ^yjTisa-i, ksKocdsii/ 

* K^o>x 7rcab , eg atpvsav iKQ^vxg* 
' ij.uxououv *k(iMVQg sgicnv k .' 

In this arrangement, it is impossible to disco- 
ver any thing like what constitutes Poetry. Har- 

k Pindari Olympia, Ode I. edit. 18mo. ab H. Stephano, 
Erroduni, 1624; & edit. 12mo. apud Hieronymum Commelinum, 


mony of numbers there is none, nor is there any 
thing like regularity of Metre ; and so far is it re- 
moved from any such qualities, that the lines are, 
on the contrary, intolerably harsh, dissonant, and 
discordant. Such, in short, is the irregularity in 
the length of the verses, that no rule seems to 
have been pursued ; and the following method is 
more probably correct, because it makes the 
Metre more regular, and certainly produces har- 
mony to the ear, of which the present mode is 
entirely destitute : 


Apigov | ph uSaw I o §£ %%v<rog j a'iQofJc.svov 

_ _ W W _ W .. _ W WWWW..WW 

Hvp cc Tc $t\ceprf£7ret | vvtcti, ^ r :ya\vo^og sJp%os 

_ _ W _ W _ WW _ w _ w _ 

YIX&tx si $' cl\sQh(% ycc\pvsv sX}s\a-t (piXov 
^Hrop, p?|%£0' ccXix | vkqttsi «AAo | SaX7n/OTSgov 

wwww w — w — w w — — _ w w 

*Ev cipsgot (pa\uvov cccr\rf>ov s^j/^cg | S*/' cti9spog f 

_ w _ w_ w — w _ w w _ _ w w 

M/jS' OXviA^riocg dyw\vct, (psgTSgov | oc.v$d<ro{isv 
"QQcV o %o\v\(po^Tog vpvog \ ap(pibocX\XcTo&i o~o(pwv 

_ WW W WW— W _ — W _ WW 

Mvjrfm | ^sX«Si7j/ Kpojyar ivoaV, sg \ dpsdv 
'lyto^svovg j fju&ico&ipo&v | *Ie'(>wvog | l$w. 

Equal disorder is visible in several of the Odes 
of Horace, and particularly, for instance, in the 
eighth and thirteenth of the first book. These 
ought to stand regulated as follow ; and the dif- 
ference will at once be seen, on turning to the 

H H 4 


works of that author, which being so easily ac- 
cessible, it is here unnecessary to insert the Odes 
in their present corrupt and depraved state. 

Lib. 1. Ode VOL 

Lydia die | per omnes | te deos | oro 

Sybarin cur | properas a'mando perldere 

Cur apri|cum oderit | campum pajtiens 

Puiveris at[que solis | cur neque mijlitaris 

Inter selquales e|quitet Galjlica 

Nee lupa'tis tempejret ora frae'ms 

Cur timet | flavum Tylberim tanjgere 

Cur olilvo sanguine | viperilno cautius 

Vitat nelque jam li|vida gestat J armis 

Brachia sae|pe disco | ssepe trans j finem 

Jaculo nojbilis expeldito quid } latet 

Ut mari|nae filiium dicunt | Thetidis 

Sub lacrymo|sae Trojae j funera ne | virilis 

Cultus in | caedem et Lycijas proripejret catervas* 

Lib. 1. OdeXIIL 

Cum tu Lydija Telephi | cervicem | roseam 

Et cerea | Telephi lau|das brachia | vse meum 

Fervens dif|ficili bijle tumet je|cur 

Tunc nee mens | mihi nee co|lor certa | sede manefe 

Humor et in | genas furjtim labitur | arguens 

Quam lentis | penitus majcerer igni|bus 

Uror seu | tibi candijdos turpalrunt humeros 

Immodicae | mero rix|ae sive pu|er furens 

Impressit | memorem den|te labris | notum 

Non si me | satis audilas speres | perpetuum 

Dulcia barlbarae laeldentem oscula | quae Venus 

Quinta parjte sui necltaris imbu|it 

Felices | ter et amplijus quos irjrupta tenet 



Copula nee | malis di|vulsus queri|moniis 
Suprema | citius sol|vet amor di|e. 

The first of these Odes is acknowledged by 
Acron \ an ancient grammarian, to be, even as it 
uniformly stands in the printed editions, really 
and substantially of the Choriambic species, which 
is known to admit the Choriambus, Bacchius, and 
Paeons. So it is, in fact, here considered ; nor is 
any one foot admitted in exchange for ano- 
ther that is less than equal to five short syllables, 
the quantity of the Bacchius, or of more than six, 
the quantity of the Choriambus. All that is now 
done, is to make the verses, in both Odes, of 
equal length, all Tetrameters ; as it is evident, 
from every consideration of Reason and good Sense, 
as to principle, and of practicability, to render 
them so, as to matter of fact, they really and cer- 
tainly should be. Nay, so well does this distribu- 
tion, in the instance of the last Ode, namely. 
Lib. 1, Ode XIII. fall in with the rest of the Ode, 
as at present regulated in the printed editions, that 
every third verse, out of the whole fifteen, as here 
arranged in the text, stands, in like manner, a 
separate verse, in the editions as printed at pre- 

But, by whatever name such Metre, from the 
more frequent recurrence of one particular foot. 

1 < Horatii Opera, cum Helenii Acronis et Porphirionis 
i eommentariis, per Georgium FabriciunV fed. Basil. 1555, p, 
.17, in a note on this Ode, 


may be thought, it is plain, that the Choriambus, 
the Molossus, and all Metres equal to six short 
syllables, are repeatedly intermixed in the same 
verse, whatever may be really its kind, with those 
of only five, as the Bacchius, Antibacchius, Cre- 
tic, &c. ; and this fact has been already abun- 
dantly proved in the instances inserted from Plau- 
tus and Terence. 

On the above Odes of Pindar and Horace, as 
arranged in the manner already proposed, musical 
persons, and those best capable of judging and 
discriminating, as possessing accurate musical 
ears, between discord and harmony of sounds, 
have been consulted on this very point, on which 
their opinion has uniformly and universally coin- 
cided with that of the present author. If any one 
there be, who cannot perceive how extremely in- 
harmonious and unlike verse, the originals are, or 
is not immediately sensible of the advantage of 
the change, let him make inquiries of those who 
can teach him in what the principles of harmony 
and discord in music consist, and he will find, that 
not to be sensible of the difference, would afford 
the strongest ground for suspecting that, however 
well-gifted he might be in other respects, or how- 
ever his advantages might have been improved, 
he must for ever relinquish all claim to a musical 

In some measure, this irregularity has arisen 
from the circumstance, that, in the manuscripts^ 
the text was, generally 2 if not universally, accom- 


panied, but especially in the instances of Pindar 
and Horace, with a very copious marginal com- 
mentary m ; and that, to make room for this, the 
space allowed for the text was too much contract- 
ed. The consequence of this was, that the Co- 
pyist frequently found, that one verse of the Poem 
could not, in writing, be contained in one line ; 
but that, on the contrary, a part of it must ne- 
cessarily be carried into a second : and, as he was 
not sufficiently skilful to discern where each verse 
ended, and the commencement of a fresh verse 
was not distinguished by a capital letter n , one 
verse has been run into another in strange confu- 
sion. In addition to this, the beginning of a fresh 
Poem is frequently, in manuscripts, decorated 
with a large initial letter, illuminated, which, by 
occupying a great portion of space, tended still 
further to lessen that allowed for the text ; and, by 
those means, to increase the difficulty of division, 
and augment the confusion of the lines. 

m Faernus, in his Emendations of Terence, which Hare has 
reprinted at the end of his edition, says, p. 28, in a note on 
the Prologue to the Heautontimorumenos, ' In libro Bembino, 
' ut per omnes alias Comcedias, antiquissima manu glossemata, 
' ex Donato, in margine ascripta sunt, ad locorum, quae inci- 

* dunt, expositionem, ita, in hanc ipsam Heautontimortimenon, 

* multa visuntur, quae Donati similiter putamus esse, cujus, in 

* hanc fabulam, commentarii interciderunt.' 

n This practice has also been continued in printed books ; 
and in the edition of Pindar, with a Latin interpretation hy 
M. i^milius, P. Fr. Porti C. F. printed by Commelin, 12mo. 
1597, the lines are so printed throughout. 


Conclusion from the Whole, 

Present system not admissible for three reasons,— Latin Comic 
metre not Iambic, but Bacchiae, for three reasons.— Pre- 
sent division of verses in Plautus and Terence not to be 
trusted, for three reasons. 

I he proposed Inquiry having now been conduct- 
ed to the extent at first designed, and all the facts 
necessary, as the foundation of a correct opinion, 
having been brought forward, and substantiated, 
nothing remains, but to observe, as the result 
of the whole, that in the course of the several 
preceding Sections, the following conclusions, be- 
sides several others, incidentally connected with 
them, have been decidedly and fully established : 
That the present system is not admissible ; 
1. Because it supposes Latin Comic Metre 
Iambic, a kind of Metre which, in itself, 
has no relation to Comedy , and with 
the rules and principles of which, as 
limited in that very system, Comic Metre 
will not agree p. 

Section XXVIIT. p Ibid. 


2. Because it requires variety in the length 
of the verses of the same scene, for 
which there is no reason or authority ; 
and which, as contradicting the practice 
of the Greek writers % and having no 
ground from principle, is an opinion 
highly irrational in itself 1 *. 

3. And, because, as is confessed even by 

those Grammarians and Critics them- 
selves, who contend for it, it cannot sub-, 
sist, without an immense number of Po- 
etical Licences, which, as deviations from 
rules established for the promotion of 
excellence, cannot, consistently with the 
first principles of Reason and common 
Sense, be received s . 

That Latin Comic Metre is not Iambic, but 
Bacchiac ; 

1. Because, as Comedy was always consi- 
dered as having a decided connexion, 
in its original, with the rites of Bac- 
chus f , and as Bacchiac was the kind of 
Metre used in the Hymns in honour of 
Bacchus u ; Bacchiac was, therefore, the 
fittest for Comedy, derived, as they both 
were, from the rites of that deity. 

i Section XX. r Section XVIII. 

* Section XXVIII. and XXII. * Section XII, 

a Section VI. 


2. Because all the supposed Trimeter Iam- 

bic verses in Plautus and Terence, in- 
cluding, also, all which at present re- 
quire Licences, may, without any Li- 
cence, be scanned as Bacchiac Tetra- 
meter*; and all those verses now supposed 
Tetrameter Iambic, may, by a more cor- 
rect division of the lines, be new regu- 
lated as Bacchiac Tetrameters also> T ; and, 
therefore, Bacchiac was the fittest for 
Comedy, derived, as it was, from the 
rites of that deity. 

3. And, because unequivocal instances of 

Bacchiac verses have been found in Plau- 
tus and Terence, which require no Li- 
cences z . 

That the present Division of Verses, in Plautus 
and Terence, is not to be trusted ; 

I. Because the oldest manuscripts are in 
Prose a , and therefore it is not the origin 
nal distribution, but a more modern re- 
gulation, and not supported by the con- 
current testimony of ancient copies, 
which, on the contrary, differ from that 
and each other b . 

* See Section XXI. y See Sect. XXIX. 

* See Section XXI. a See Sect. XVII, 
b See Section XVI. and XVII. 


2. Because it was evidently made on the 

false principles of the prevailing system. 

3. And, lastly, because Bentley has found 

it necessary, both in Plautus and Te- 
rence, to alter the division d . 

If, after this, the system at present received 
can maintain its ground ; if the existing Division or 
Distribution of the Verses can be considered as of 
any authority, or the admission of the principles of 
Bacchiac Metre, to procure a better and more ra- 
tional regulation, can be refused; incontrovertible 
evidence, and positive facts, well authenticated, 
are of no avail, argument is useless, and reason- 
ing wholly in vain. 

II m U ■ I i i Ml W I ' . . . . ■ 'i ■ . . .... 

d Section XXIX, 


N. E. The Letter ri, after any Number, refers to a Note in that Pags. 

JEschylus, instance from him of a Trochee in Iambic verse, 

129, n. 
Ahxamenes, Teius, first invented Dialogue, 142, n. 
Amphibrachys, admissible in Heroic verse, 114. Instances of, 
119, 120, 121, 126. Not received by the Grammarians into 
Iambic verse, 130. Admissible into Iambic verse, 132. 
Anapast, admissible in Heroic verse, 114- Instances of, 115, 

117,118, 126. 
Andronicus (Livins) first introduced Comedy at Rome, 156. 
Archilochns, the supposed inventor, or rather introducer, of Iam- 
bic verse into Greece, 56. All Lyric Poetry probably attri- 
butable to him, 57. The principles of all borrowed by him 
from the Psalms of David, 58. He used Iambic Trimeter 
acatalectic and Iambic Tetrameter catalectic, 58,59. Spe- 
cimens from his writings, to ascertain what sorts of verse he 
employed, 59, &c. He also employed Trochaic Trimeter aca- 
talectic and Iambic Trimeter acatalectic together, 64. He 
appears to have introduced, together with the Trochaic, the 
Iambic foot also in the same line, 64. lie did not apply Iam- 
bic for invective, but probably only used it, because it was 
cheerful, and fit for Lyric purposes, 65. He appears to have 
used Bacchiac or Paeonic, 71. A specimen from him, as 
given by Hephaastion, 71. Another specimen of Bacchiac 
from him, as given by Stobseus, 73. Another, 75, Part of 
a Dithyrambic hymn by him, 77- Iambic verse introduced 
by him, as better suiting Lyric subjects, 80. 
Aristophanes. Pseonic supposed by some invented by Aristo- 
phanes, 135, n. Specimens of the Chorus from him, 239. 
Examples of verse from him, 247. Bisset's enumeration of 
the sorts of verse, which he used, 253. 
Aristotle, his opinion that a poem, containing all sorts of verse, 
is not a poem, 22, n> His sentiments as to the three sorts of 
rhythmical time, 38, 39, n. His opinion that the Dithyramb 
was the origin of Tragedy, 84, n. His idea as to the change 
of metre in Tragedy, 84, n. 258. A shameful interpolation 
by Bishop Hare, in the passage from Aristotle, 84, n. 259. 
His opinion that Comedy had Music only in particular parts, 

i i 


namely, between the acts, 162. His sentiments on the parts 
of Tragedy, 168. Remarks on it, 168. Says Tragic metre 
was originally Tetrameter, 262. His opinion what Rhyth- 
mus should be used in public speaking, 258, n. Says 
Tragedy derived from the Dithyramb, an hymn to Bacchus, 
264. The Tetrameter verse mentioned by Aristotle, as used 
in Tragedy, probably Bacchiac, 266. Absurdly derives Co- 
medy from the Phallica, 266. His contradictory opinions as 
to Iambic, 400. Objections to them, and the contradictions 
pointed out, 401. His tract De Poetica not to be trusted, 
and why, 434. That tract much relied on by classical scho- 
lars, 434. When he lived, 434. Fate of his writings after 
his death, 435, &c. Doubtful whether the treatise De Po- 
etica by Aristotle the Stagyrite, 439. If his, it is probably 
corrupt and interpolated, 440. 
Augustin of Eugubio, his opinion on the nature of Hebrew 
Poetry, 15. His sentiments examined, 23. 


Bacchiac, or Phonic Verse. Archilochus appears to have used 
Bacchiac or Paeonic, 71. A specimen from him, as given by 
Hephaestion, 71. This specimen erroneously supposed, by 
Hephaestion, a compound of two sorts of metre, 71. A spe- 
cimen of Paeonic, by Cratinus, as given by Hephaestion, 71. 
A similar error of Hephaestion's, as to this also, 71. The 
scanning of all these rectified, which shows them to be Paeonic, 
72. Another specimen of Bacchiac from Archilochus, as 
given by Stobaeus, 72. This better regulated, 73. Another 
from Stobaeus, 73. A better regulation, 74. Another speci- 
men from Archilochus, as given by Stobaeus, 75. A better 
regulation, 76. Another regulation, by which the lines may 
be made Trochaic Dimeter, 76. Part of a Dithyrambic 
hymn by Archilochus, 77. These lines Bacchiac, 77. The 
Bacchiac foot so named, because used in hymns to Bac- 
chus, 77, 81. Choriambic, called Bacchiac, 78. Choriam- 
bic used by Cratinus and Phrynichius, 78. Bacchiac, Cre- 
tic, and Paeonic all one sort, 79. Paeonic verse applied by 
Archilochus to the rites of Bacchus, probably because he 
found the succession of syllables better calculated for that 
sort, 80. Satyric Poetry probably Bacchiac or Paeonic, 84» 
What feet it admits, 135. Paeonic erroneously divided into 
three sorts, Paeonic, Bacchiac, and Cretic, 135, 136. For 
this division, Poetical Licences unnecessarily introduced, 
even by Bentley, 136, 137. Paeonic supposed, by some, 
Invented by Aristophanes, 135, n. Used by Cratinus and 
Archilochus, 135, n. Hephaestion's opinion as to Paeonic, 
136. Admits, as appears from specimens given by Bentley, 
feet of six times, as well as those of five, 138. Enumeration 
of feet admissible, 139. Those Tragic verses, already sup- 


posed Iambic Tetrameter, are probably Bacchiac, 233. No 
objection to this, excepting only in verses consisting wholly 
of the Iambus, 236. That, however, easily removable, 237. 
Chorusses in the Greek Comedies equally divisible as Bac- 
chiac Tetrameter verse, 238. Scarcely possible to conclude 
that the metre employed in the Greek Tragedies and Come- 
dies was any other than Bacchiac Tetrameter, 24-1. The Te- 
trameter verse mentioned by Aristotle, as used in Tragedy, 
probably Bacchiac, 266. Bacchiac or Paeonic verse, as con- 
nected with Bacchus, had a kind of natural connexion with 
Comedy, 275. Strong reasons, therefore, for conceiving Greek 
Comic verse Bacchiac, 278. Verses supposed Iambic Tri- 
meters, will scan as Bacchiac Tetrameter, 281. A specimen 
from Plautus so treated, 282. Examples of Bacchiac verses 
from Plautus, 283, 284, 286, 287. Instances of the like kind 
from Terence, 288. Comic Latin verse imagined Paeonic or 
.Bacchiac, and why, 290. Reasons for conceiving Latin Comic 
verse Bacchiac, 447. Every reason to think Saturnian Bac- 
chiac, 454. Bentley has ascertained Bacchiac and Cretic 
verses in Plautus and Terence, 457. Cretic or Paeonic verses 
in Terence, 460. Some in Plautus's Amphitruo, 462. Bac- 
chiac or Saturnian verse admits all equivalent feet, but no 
Licences, 467. Feet actually occurring in the Paeonic or 
Bacchiac verses in Plautus and Terence, 467. Ail equivalent 
feet admissible on principle, 468. An Ode of Pindar arranged 
as Bacchiac verse, 471. Two Odes of Horace so treated, 
472. — -See Pcsonic Verse. 

Bacchus. Rites of Bacchus made Poetry familiar to the com- 
mon people, 140. The Romans acknowledged in Comedy 
some relation to Bacchus, 269. An altar to him placed on 
the stage, 269. 

Benedictus of Florence completed Politian's revision of Te- 
rence, 209. The result published by him in 1505, and again 
in 1519, 209. Benedictus has mistaken two passages in Aris- 
totle, 210. 

Bentley erroneously considers Bacchiac, Cretic, and Pseonic, as 
of different kinds, 79. Specimens of Bacchiac and Paeonic 
verse given by him, 138, 288. His objections to Quintilian's 
opinion, that Terence should have used only Trimeters, 218* 
Remarks on them, 220. Bentley ignorant of Music, 222. He 
has confounded together Time and Tune, and length of verse, 
and constituent feet, 223. He has ascertained Bacchiac and 
Cretic verses in Plautus and Terence, 457. Has new regu- 
lated a scene in Plautus, 459. 

Brencman (Henry), his observations on the Florentine Manu- 
script of the Pandect, 312, &c. 

Cappel (Louis), his opinion on the nature of Hebrew Poetry 5 15* 

ii 2 


Choriambic Verse, called Bacchiac, 78. Mallitrs Theodorus's 
opinion as to Choriambic, 405. Censured, 405. Victorinus, 
his opinion on Choriambic, 406. Objections to it, 407. 

Chorus. Chorus in the Greek Tragedies and Comedies, its na- 
ture, and of what kind of verse their speeches consisted, 
227. Greek Chorusses do not contain variety of metre, 228. 
Aristotle confines the performance of the Chorus to the in- 
terval between the acts, 228. Reason to think no part of 
these intermediate performances now existing, 228. The 
term Chorus does not necessarily imply singers or dancers, or 
musical performances, but only a multitude of persons, 229. 
Chorus, as employed in the Greek Tragedies, different from 
that used between the acts, 230. The nature of the former 
correctly defined, 230. Aristotle says Tragic verse was ori- 
ginally Tetrameter, 232. Reason to conclude that to have 
been Bacchiac, 232. Chorusses in the Greek Tragedies ca- 
pable of arrangement as Bacchiac verse, 233. Instances and 
specimens of this, 233. Those Tragic verses already sup- 
posed Iambic Trimeter are probably Bacchiac Tetrameter, 
233. No objection to this, excepting only in verses consist- 
ing wholly of the Iambus, 236. That, however, easily re- 
movable, 237. Chorusses in the Greek Comedies divi- 
sible as Bacchiac Tetrameter verse, 238. Specimens from 
Aristophanes, 239. Scarcely possible to conclude that the 
metre employed in the Greek Tragedies and Comedies was 
any other than Bacchiac Tetrameter, 241. 

Comedy, origin of, 139. Theatrical productions, how exhi- 
bited originally, 146. At first, one actor only, 147. A se- 
cond introduced, 147- The number increased still further, 
148. Comedy not originally sung through the streets, 148. 
Susarion the first who furnished poetical performances to the 
people at large, 149. What they probably were, 149. Co- 
medy originally a Chorus of singers without actors, 149. 
Plot for Comedy, and dress for the actor, when and by whom 
introduced, 150. Comedy, when first so called, 150. Ety- 
mology and reason of the name, 151. Tragedy not then in- 
vented, 152. Improvements in Comedy by Epicharmus and 
Phormis, 153. Comedy, at this time, no more than a Cho- 
rus of singers and musical performers, 153. The same with 
that which flourished in the first age of Comedy at Athens, 
153. Improvements under Pericles, 153. Brought to per- 
fection by Eupolis and Aristophanes, 154. Comedy in the 
two first ages called the Old, 154. Its characteristics, 154. 
Athens taken by Lysander, 154. Comedy restricted, 154. 
Third age of Comedy, 155. Styled the Middle Comedy, 155. 
Its peculiarities, 155. Further restrictions on it in the time 
of Alexander, 155. Fourth age of Comedy, 155. Called 
the New Comedy, 156. Its characteristics, 156. The Ro- 
mans only copied the New, 156. Livius Andronicus first in- 


troduced Comedy at Rome, 156. Characteristics of the four 
different ages of Comedy more distinctly stated, 157. Co- 
medy earlier than Tragedy, 159. Not a musical performance 
throughout, 161. Titles of Terence's plaj^s have occasioned 
the question, 161. Aristotle's opinion that it had Music only 
in particular parts, namely, between the acts, 162. Evan- 
thius says the Chorus rejected, and why, in the New Comedy, 
168. In the Roman Comedies, Music how employed, 170. 
Passage from Plautus's Pseudolus, 170. Another from his 
Casina, 170. Horace, his opinion as to the Chorus, 171. 
Remarks on it, 171. His sentiments as to the use of the 
Tibia, 172. Diomedes, his opinion on the parts of Comedy, 
172. Remarks on it, 174?. Passage from the Prolegomena, 
Terence, edit. 1479, 176. Another from the same, 177. 
Another from Terence, edit. 1499, 177. Another from Guido 
Juvenal is, in the same edition, 177. Another from Iodocus 
Radius Ascensius, Terence, edit. 1527, 178. Another from 
Terence, edit. Aldus, 1570, 178. Another from Juventius, 
Terence, edit. Spencer, 1734, 179. Another from Scaliger 
De Poetice, 179, n. Reasons why Comedy could not have 
been a musical performance, 179, &c. Scarcely possible to 
conclude that the metre employed in the Greek Comedies 
_was any other than Bacchiac Tetrameter, 241. Comedy 
absurdly derived, by Aristotle, from the Phallica, 266. Co- 
medy, as relating to private individuals, properly called 
(JiauXiJcoj, 268. Romans acknowledged in Comedy some rela- 
tion to Bacchus, 269. Reasons why Iambic verse not pro- 
perly applicable to Comedy, 271, &c. Greek Comic verse, 
therefore, probably not Iambic, 274. Bacchiac verse, as 
connected with Bacchus, had a kind of natural connexion 
with Comedy, 275. Strong reasons, therefore, for conceiv- 
ing Greek Comic verse Bacchiac, 278. 

Comic Verse, Greek, Species of verse used by Greek Comic 
writers, 242. Probably not Iambic, 256, 271. Strong rea- 
sons for conceiving Greek Comic verse to have been Bac- 
chiac, 278. 

Comic Verse, Latin, specimens of, 281. Verses supposed 
Iambic Trimeters, will scan as Bacchiac Tetrameters, 281. -A 
specimen from Plautus so treated, 282. Examples of verses 
rightly supposed Bacchiac, from Plautus, 283, 284, 286, 287. 
Instances of the like kind from Terence, 288. These verses, 
however apparently different from the Greek specimens given 
in Section XX. may still perhaps be derived from the same 
source, 289. Imagined Paeonic or Bacchiac, and why, 290. 
. Priscian says, the Comic writers used principally Trimeters 
and Tetrameters, the rest seldom, 295. Latin Comic metre 
cannot be Iambic, 442. Priscian's opinion that it is Iambic, 
examined, 442. Horace's sentiments as to Iambic examined, 
443. Objections to him and his testimony, 447. Reasons 

1 1 a 


for conceiving it, on the contrary, Bacchiac, 448. Variety 

of verse in length not allowable, 449. Latin Comic metre 
really Saturnian or Bacchiac, 451. 

Cratinus. A specimen of Pasonic from Cratinus, as given by 
Hephsestion, 71. Choriambic used by Cratinus, 78. Speci- 
mens of verse from him, 246, 247. 

Cretie Verse. Pasonic erroneously divided into three sorts, 
-Paeonic, Bacchiac, and Cretie, 135, 136. — See Bacchiac or 
Pceonic Verse. 


Diomedes, his opinion as to the three sorts of rhythmical 
time, 44. His opinion on the parts of Comedy, 172. Re- 
marks on it, 174. His sentiments as to Iambic verse, 405. 
His opinion on Trochaic, 406. Another passage from him 
on Trochaic, 406. Objections to these," 406. 

Dithyramb. Part of a Dithyrambic hymn by Archilochus, 77. 
Hymns to Bacchus denominated Dithyrambic, 82. Etymo- 
logy of the term, 83. Aristotle's opinion that the Dithyramb 
was the origin of Tragedy, 84, 264. 


EnniuSy his affectations no justification for Poetical Licences, 

Eupolis y specimens of Verse from him, 243, 244, 245. 


Gomarus (Fr.) t his opinion as to the nature of Hebrew Po- 
etry, 15. Remarks on it, 16. 

Grammarians. Supposed authority of Grammarians not to be 
admitted or received, 399. Aristotle's contradictory opinions 
as to Iambic, 400. Objections to them, and the contradic- 
tions pointed out, 401. Terentianus Maurus's definition of 
Iambic verse censured, 402. His account of Trochaic eata- 
lectic reprehended, 402. His description of Iambic in ano- 
ther place, 403. His account of Scazontic Iambic, 403. 
Of Iambic catalectic Tetrameter, 404*. Objections to all 
these, 404. Plotius, his description of the Palimbacchiac, 
404. Objections to it, 405. Mallius Theodorus's opinion 
as to Choriambic, 405. Censured, 405. Diomedes, his sen- 
timents as to Iambic, 405. His opinion on Trochaic, 406. 
Another passage from him on Trochaic, 406. Objections to 
these, 406. Victorinus, his opinion on Choriambic, 40.6. 
Objections to it, 407. His sentiments on Ionic, 407. Ob- 
jections to them, 407. His opinion on Phalsecian, 407. Ob- 
jection to it, 407. His opinion as to the admission of the 
Trochee with the Iambus, 408. Remarks on it, 409. Seve - 
ral other instances of erroneous descriptions from Servius 
and Victorinus, 410, 412; An instance from Suidas, 414, n. 


Csesura claimed as a Licence for a Jong syllable, 415. But 
the Caesura and Licence fall in different places, 415. Re- 
marks on the lines themselves, 416. - All the above-mention- 
ed instances may be corrected by a small alteration, 417. Li- 
cence of making a diphthong short before a vowel not allow- 
able, 419. The instance explained, 419. Contraction of 
two vowels unjustly claimed in a particular instance, 421. A 
line in Homer corrected, 422. Dividing one word at the end 
of a line absurd, 423. Rejection of the letter S before a 
consonant, not justifiable, 427. The supposed instance is 
read differently in different copies, and free from any Licence, 
427, n. Some supposed instances of Licences in Juvenal 
and Virgil explained, 429, &c. 

Greece. Linus first brought learning into Greece from Phoeni- 
cia, 48. 

Greeks not the original discoverers of science, 5. Greeks 
obtained from Egypt astronomy and their mythology, 8. 
Greek philosophers travelled into Egypt, 9. Classical preju- 
dices in favour of Greek literature almost inveterate, 11. 
Imitations by the Greeks, not usually, if ever, disclosed in 
the course of classical education, 11. Instances of poems 
among the Jews, prior to the time of the Greeks, 12. 

Grotius, his opinion on the nature of Hebrew Poetry, 15. 


Hare ( Bishop J, a shameful interpolation by him, in a passage 
from Aristotle, 84, n. 259. His classification of seventeen 
sorts of Poetical Licences, 302. 

Hephcestion, his opinion as to Poeonic verse, 136. 

Heroic Verse. Heroic the first sort of Poetry, 48. The Spon- 
dee admitted, in Heroic Poetry, in exchange for the Dactyl, 
89.. Admits only feet exactly equivalent, 89. What feet 
it receives, 114. Besides the Dactyl and Spondee, it ad- 
mits the Anapaest, Amphibrachys, and Proceleusma, 114. 
Anapaest, an example of, from Homer, 115. Another from 
Virgil, 117. Another from Horace, 118. Amphibrachys, an 
example of, from Homer, 119. Four examples from Virgil, 
120, 121. Proceleusma, an instance of, 122. Several from 
Virgil, 123. These feet admissible at the end of the verse 
also, 1.25. Dactyl, examples of, 125. Anapaest, instances 
of, 125. Amphibrachys, instance of, 126. 

Hexameter Verse. Hexameter verse the earliest kind among 
the Jews, as well as among the Greeks, 35. Poems written by 
Linus in Hexameter verse, 49. Linus, Musaeus, Homer, and 
Hesiod, all wrote in Hexameter verse, 51. Hexameter verse 
originally the only kind, 79. Hymns to Bacchus originally 
in that metre, 80. — See also Heroic Verse. 

Homer, an example from him of an Anapaest in Heroic verse, 



115. An example from him, of an Amphibrachys in an He- 
roic verse, 119. 

Horace objects to all deviations from rule, 97. Passages 
from him, 93, 99. An example from him, of an Anapaest in 
an Heroic verse, 118. His opinion as to the Chorus, 171. 
Remarks on it, 171. His sentiments as to the use of the 
Tibiae, 172. Horace's sentiments as to Iambic examined, 
443, &c. Objections to him and his testimony, 447. His 
Odes to be new regulated, 469. An Ode of Horace arranged 
as Bacchiac, 472. Another so treated, 472. Reasons for 
the present irregularity, 474. 

Hubert (Theodore), his opinion as to the nature of Hebrew- 
Poetry, 15. Remarks on it, 16. 

I and J. 
Iambic Verse. Archilochus the supposed inventor, or rather 
introducer, of Iambic verse into Greece, 56. Iambic the se- 
cond sort of Poetry, 56. Iambic Trimeter acatalectic, Iam- 
bic Tetrameter catalectic, used by Archilochus, 58, 59. 
Iambic Trimeter acatalectic, intermixed with Trochaic Te- 
trameter catalectic, appears used, but probably it ought to 
be arranged as all Trimeters, 63. Iambic and Trochaic verses 
may be intermixed, 63. Archilochus uses, on another occa- 
sion, Trochaic Trimeter acatalectic and Iambic Trimeter 
acatalectic together, 64. He appears to have introduced, to- 
gether with the Trochaic, the Iambic foot also, in the same 
line, 64. Reasonable he should do so, 65. He did not apply 
Iambic for invective, but probably only used it, because it 
was cheerful and fit for Lyric purposes, 65> Present etymo- 
logy of the name Iambic not defensible, 66. A new one pro- 
posed, 67. Iambic verse introduced by Archilochus, as bet- 
ter suiting Lyric subjects, 80. The Tribrachys received in 
the Iambic, instead of the Iambus, 89. In the Iambic me- 
tres of four times, received instead of those of three, 90. Of 
what feet Iambic verse consists, 127. Victorinus's opinion, 
that there are three sorts of Iambic, viz. Iambic, Trochaic, 
and a mixture of both, 127. Remarks on it, 128. Eight 
sorts of feet deducible from the Iambus and Spondee, the two 
fundamental feet of the Iambic, 128. What they are, stated, 
.128. Five of these already acknowledged by Grammarians, 
128. Trochee not admitted by them, 128. Victorinus, his 
opinion on that point, 130, n. Terentianus Maurus, his sen- 
timents on that subject, 129, n. Amphibrachys not received 
by the Grammarians, 130. Nor Proceleusma, 130. An ex- 
ample of the Proceleusma, 130, n. Trochee admissible, and 
no reason for excluding it, 131. Instances from iEschylus, 
Sophocles, and Juba, 129, n. Juba's opinion, 129. Amphi- 
brachys and Proceleusma equally admissible, 1 32. Iambic 
verse not properly applicable to Comedy, 271, &c. Greek 


Comic verse probably not Iambic, 271. Priscian says, that 
Comic writers used Iambic verse, and introduced into it five 
sorts of feet, 294. He says the verses are either Monometers, 
&c. 295. Priscian says, Terence used Trochaic metre, mixed 
and confused with Iambic, 296. Aristotle's contradictory 
opinions as to Iambic, 400. Objections to them, and the con- 
tradictions pointed out, 401. Terentianus Maurus's defini- 
tion of Iambic verse censured, 402. His description of Iam- 
bic in another place, 403. His account of Scazontic Iambic, 
403. Of Iambic catalectic Tetrameter, 404. Objections to 
all these, 404. Diomedes, his sentiments as to Iambic, 405. 
Victorinus, his opinion as to the admission of (he Trochee 
xvith the Iambus, 408. Remarks on it, 409. Latin Comic 
metre cannot be Iambic, 442. Priscian's opinion that it is 
Iambic examined, 442. Horace's sentiments as to Iambic 
examined, 443, &c. Objections to him and his testimony, 
Jerom (St.), his opinion as to the nature of Hebrew Poetry, 

14, 24. His and Scaliger's opinions compared, 26. 
Ionic Verse. Victorinus's sentiments on Ionic verse, 407. Ob- 
jections to them, 407. 
Josephics, his opinion as to the nature of Hebrew Poetry, 14, 

23, 24. 
Juba, his opinion as to the admission of the Trochee in Iam- 
bic verse, 129. 
Juvenal, a supposed instance of a Licence in him explained, 

Le Clerc, his opinion on the nature of Hebrew Poetry, 15. 

His opinion refuted, 18. 
Licences (Poetical), do not seem to have been used in Hebrew 
Poetry, 32. None admissible, 92. Precepts did not precede, 
but follow the invention of arts, 94. Every deviation from 
rule a defect, 95. Deviation cannot be justified, 96. No 
instance of necessity, 96. Poetical Licences perpetually 
claimed by the Grammarians, 97. Horace objects to all de- 
viations from rule, 97. Passages from him, 98, 99. Poetical 
Licences no other than blemishes, 99. Licences supposed, 
where none existed, 99. All objectionable, as deviations 
from rule, 100, &c. Rule intended to produce excellence, 
and prevent error and deformity, 100. Priscian says, viola- 
tions of Prosodia frequent among Dramatic writers, 100, 296. 
And that Terence used them more than others, 100, 296. If so, 
they are not models of excellence, 101. And Terence is more 
culpable than all others, 101. It cannot be supposed the au- 
dience would have tolerated them, 101 » Constant violation of 
rule, and perpetual variety of verse, would render all prose 
verse, 102. If indulgences unlimited, impossible to decide as 
to the nature of any species of Poetry, 102. Poetical Li- 



cences not authorized by violent elisions and contractions in 
manuscripts, because they occur in prose works also, 103. 
Instances of this kind in the Florentine Pandect, 103. A si- 
milar example in Terence, edit. 1479, 104, n. Affectations 
of Ennius and Lucretius, no justification for Poetical Li- 
cences, 105. No pretence that rules of Prosodia different in 
Plautus, Terence, Virgil, or Horace's times, 107. Nature 
of apparent variations from rule, ill understood, 108. Not 
violations of rule, 108. Licentious readings sometimes pre- 
ferred, 108. Motive to this, a wish in the Critic to display 
his own learning, 109. Poetical Licences, doubtful if any 
really exist in Virgil and Horace, 111. Many Licences 
removable, by the application of the musical principle, for 
the reception of all equivalent feet, 111. Others may be 
prevented, by preferring another reading, 112. Others are 
merely an observance of some rule in the Greek Prosodia, 
where the Latin had not followed it, 1 13. And the remain- 
der principally; if not wholly, consist of contractions of vow- 
els, or dissolutions of diphthongs, 113. They do not, there- 
fore, affect the quantities of syllables, 113. Hare (Bishop), 
his classification of seventeen sorts of Poetical Licences, 302. 
Caesura claimed as a Licence for a long syllable, 415. But 
the Caesura and Licence fall in different places, 415. Re- 
marks on the lines themselves, 416. All the above-mentioned 
instances may be corrected by a small alteration, 417. Li- 
cence of making a diphthong short before a vowel, not allow- 
able, 419. The instances explained, 419. Contraction of 
two vowels unjustly claimed in a particular instance, 421. 
A line in Homer corrected, 422. Dividing one word at the 
end of a line absurd, 423. Rejection of the letter S before a 
consonant, not Justifiable, 427. The supposed instance is 
read differently in different copies, and free from any Licence, 
427, n. Some supposed instances of Licences in Juvenal 
and Virgil explained, 428, &c. 

Linus, first brought learning into Greece from Phoenicia, 48. 
Poems written by him in Hexameter verse, 49. 

Loivth ( Bishop J, his opinion as to the nature of Hebrew Po- 
etry, 32. 

Lucretius, his affectations, no justification for Poetical Li- 
cences, 105. 


MaMiscripts. Authority of manuscripts and ancient copies not 
to be received in contradiction to Prosodia, 304, Errors of 
manuscripts described and stated, 304. Similar defects in 
printed editions, 308. Not peculiar to the works of Greek 
authors, 309. No manuscript can be of authority merely as 
a manuscript, or from its age, 310. But its merit must be 
'.determined by its observance or neglect of the rules of Gram- 
mar- and Prosodia, ,310- Transcribers of manuscripts,' who 


they were, and what their qualifications,' merits, and defects, 

312. Brencman correct in his opinion, as to the necessity Of 
knowing the merits and faults of transcribers and correctors, 

313. What Brencman has said, though applied by him to 
the Florentine manuscript of the Pandect only, equally ap- 
plicable to manuscripts in general, 314. The earliest manu- 
scripts of Terence and Plautus supposed of the same age 
with that manuscript, 314. Difficulty of reading manuscripts, 
$16. Few persons able to do it, 317. The Florentine ma- 
nuscript described, 318, &c. Scribes, Writers, or Copyists, 
their different kinds, 323. Librarii, simple Copyists, 323. 
Notarii, those who used compendious methods of writing, 
323. Antiquarii, those who copied ancient characters, 
323. Singularii, short-hand writers, or those who used ab- 
breviations, 323. Exceptores, notaries who took down in 
writing from dictation what was spoken, 324. Calculatores, 
accountants, 325. Tabularii, copyists of accounts, 325. 
Rationarii, keepers of accounts, 325. Logistae, the same 
sort of persons, 325. Miniculatores, miniature painters, 
or illuminators, who ornamented and decorated the initial 
letters and other places, 326. Enfranchised slaves formerly 
betook themselves to this employment, 326. Afterwards, 
whoever chose to do so, in hopes of reward, and for hire, 
326. And, at length, the monks, 327. Copyists of the 
Florentine manuscript were, by profession, KaXXtypa<po», or 
such as made beauty and elegance of the writing and cha- . 
racter their object, 328. They were several in number, and 
by birth Greeks, 328. Merits of these Copyists accuracy 
and fidelity, 329. Several examples of each, 329, &c. Cir- 
cumducere literas, what the phrase signifies, illustrated from 
Suetonius, 336. Copyists were themselves Correctors, 336. 
Faults of those Copyists, 337. Specimens of their unskilful- 
ness and ignorance, 337, &c. Others of their negligence or 
carelessness and folly, which were of several sorts, 340, Sic. 
Instance of an omission in the title De Minoribus, from the 
Florentine Pandect, 346. Other examples of their folly and 
trifling, but more ridiculous than dangerous, 349. Correc- 
tions in manuscripts, how, and by whom made, 351. The 
Florentine manuscript of the Pandect appears to have been 
read over again some time after it was written, 352. The 
Correctors men of the same kind as the Copyists, 353. In 
proportion as a manuscript more correct, the writing less 
beautiful, 355. Faults left after correction, 355. Examples 
of partial, erroneous, and foolish corrections, 356. All the 
corrections not by the same hand, nor all of the same period, 
359. Who appear to have been the Correctors of this copy, 
and on what occasion, 359. Age of each correction cannot 
be fixed, especially if it is made on another, 360. Not al- 
•ivays corrected by another copy, as appears from the rluctu- 


ati on of some of the corrections, 362. Corrections where 
the former writing left, 363, &c. An erroneous correction, 
arising from ignorance of the language, and of the customs 
of antiquity, 367. Correct passages corrupted from vicious 
ones, 369. Senseless and ridiculous corrections by recent 
critics, 370. Mark of correction, 373. Mark for expung- 
ing, 373. Ancient method of writing and expunging, 
373. Point for expunging in the Florentine Pandect, the 
same with that used by the Hebrews and Greeks, 375. Mode 
of expunging several words by small hooks or brackets facing 
each other, 376. Corrections with a pen or penknife, 378. 
Letters with a line drawn through the writing, 380, 381. 
-Mark. for supplying several words when omitted in the Pan- 
dect, 384. Marks for transposition, 385. Indications for 
uniting or disjoining, 386. Numbers used for distinction of 
pages, 387. Some alphabetical numbers, 387. Points or 
stops a modern invention, 389. Origin of the comma, 390. 
Single points, 391. Other superfluous ones, 391. Mark of 
a paragraph, 392. Meaning, use, and form of the same, 
392. Marks of approving or censuring, or of distinguishing 
a passage for observation, 394-. Also for pointing out a fault 
or suspected place, 395. Other marks and marginal notes, 
especially crosses, 396. Interlineary indications of proper 
names, 397. 

Menander. Vietorinus's opinion as to his change of verse exa- 
mined, 223. Specimen of verse used by him, 252. 

Metre. Aristotle's idea as to the change of Metre in Tragedy, 
84, n. 258. Scarcely possible to conclude that the metre em- 
ployed in the Greek Tragedies and Comedies was any other 
than Bacehiac Tetrameter, 241. 

Music. Quintilian's opinion of the necessity of a knowledge of 
Music to a Grammarian, 37, »•• 

Mythology (Heathen J, borrowed from the Scriptures, 6. Me- 
gasthenes, Aristobulus, and Numenius, their opinions to that 
effect, 7. 


Orpheus, Poems written by him, 49. He is said to have been 
a great promoter, if not the inventor, of the heathen mytho- 
logy, 50. And to have first introduced the rites of Bacchus, 
50. The authority of his poems doubtful, as they have been 
ascribed to Onomacritus, 50. 


Phonic. See Bacehiac or Pceonic Verse. The third sort of 
Poetry, 70. Applied, by Archiiochus, to the rites of Bac- 
chus, probably because the succession of syllables better- 
calculated for that sort, 80. The Bacchius, Cretic, Anti- 
bacchius, &c. admitted into the Paeonic, 89. In Paeonic, were 


received metres of six times in exchange for those of Give, 
89. Erroneously divided into three sorts, Paeonic, Bacchiac, 
and Cretic, 135, 136. 

Palimbacchiac. Plotius, his description of the Palimbacchiac, 

Pandect. Brencman's observations on the Florentine manuscript 
of the Pandect, 313, &c. What Brencman has said of the 
Florentine Pandect, equally applicable to all manuscripts is 
general, 314. 

Pentameter Verse, very doubtful by whom invented, as Ho- 
race says, 51. Ascribed to Pythagoras, Mimnermus, and 
Ortugen, but used by Archilochus, 52. An instance from 
him, 52. Another referred to, 53. Probably invented be- 
tween the time of Hesiod and Archilochus, but certainly 
before Pythagoras and Mimnermus, 54. Used by Tyrtaeus, 
Mimnermus, and Solon, 54. 

Phalcecian Verse. Victorinus's opinion on Phalaecian verse, 
407. Objections to it, 407. 

Philemon, specimens of verse used by him, 248, 249. 

Philo JudauS) his opinion as to the nature of Hebrew Poe- 
try, 15. 

Pindar, his Odes to be new regulated, 469. An Ode of 
Pindar, as it now stands, 470. Objections to it, 471. The 
same fresh arranged as Bacchiac, 471. Reasons for the pre- 
sent irregularity, 474. 

Plautus. The Carthaginian scene in Plautus's Peenulus com- 
pletely Hebrew and in verse, 20. Plautus and Terence, 
particulars respecting the first publication of them, 189, 
Schmeider's account of the first publication of Plautus from a 
manuscript at Florence, 189. He has stated incorrectly a 
passage from the Preface, 190. Remarks on what he has 
said and on the passage itself, J 91. Pareus, his account of 
a manuscript of Plautus in the Palatine Library, 193. Re- 
marks on his account, 191. Interval of time between dates 
v of the oldest manuscripts and the time when Plautus and 
Terence lived, 207. Plautus, when he lived, 225. The ear- 
liest manuscripts of Plautus and Terence supposed of the 
same age with the Florentine Pandect, 314. Bentley has as- 
certained Bacchiac and Cretic verses in Plautus and" Terence, 
457. Bentley has new regulated a scene in Plautus, 459. 
Cretic or Paeonic verses in Plautus's Amphitruo, 46] . New 
regulation of part of the Amphitruo, Act I. Sc. 1 . 462. 

Plotius, his description of the Palimbacchiac, 404. Objec- 
tions to it, 405. 
Poems. Instances of Poems among the Jews prior to the time 

of. the Greeks, 12. Poems, why so called, 143. 
Poetry, first known and practised among the Jews, 4. There 
can be but three sorts of Poetry, 37. There can be but 
three sorts of Versification substantially differing, 44, All 

metrical feet must be ranged by their proportions, not num- 
ber of syllables, 15. The whole system thus placed, 45. 
Heroic the first .sort of Poetry. 48. Iambic the second sort 
of Poetry. 56* Pa?onie the third sort of Poetry, 70. Reason 
for admitting an exchange of one foot for another equivalent 
in valuer 87, The musical principle adopted, by which an 
exchange of one bar for any other equivalent in value of time 
is allowed, % 68. Two short syllables equal to one long, 89, n. 
The Spondee admitted in Heroic Poetry in exchange for the 
Dactyl, 89i The Bacchius, Cretic, Antibacchius, &c. ad- 
mitted into the PaeoniCj 89. The Tribrachys received in the 
Iambic instead of the Iambus, 89. Heroic Poetry admits 
only feet exactly equivalent., 89. But in Pseonic were re- 
ceived metres of six times in exchange for those of five, 89. 
And in Iambic those; of four instead of those of three, 90. Ne- 
cessity the reason for this, in order to prevent the too great 
exclusion of words and subjects, 90. 
Poetry, Greek. Models of all the various sorts of Greek Po- 
etry to be found much earlier among the Jews, 34. Greek 
Poetry, and its rules, certainly derived from the poems in 
the Scriptures, 35. Hexameter verse the earliest among the 
Jews, as well as among the Greeks, 35. Linus, Musaeus, 
Homer, and Hesiod, all wrote in Hexameter verse, 51. 
Pentameter verse, very doubtful by whom invented, as Ho- 
race says, 51. Ascribed to Pythagoras, Mimnermus, and 
Ortugen, but used by Archilochus, 52. An instance from 
him, 52. Another referred to, 53. Probably invented be- 
tween the time of Hesiod and Archilochus, but certainly be- 
fore Pythagoras and Mimnermus, 54. Pentameter verse- used 
by Tyrtaeus,. Mimnermus, and Solon, 54. 
Poetry, Hebrew. Its nature, 13. Calmet has collected the 
several opinions on this subject, 14. Josephus, St. Jerom, 
Phjlo Judseus, Theodore Hubert, Francis Gomarus, Le Gere, 
. Scaliger, Augustin of Eugubio, Louis Cappel, Grotius, &c. 
their several opinions, as stated by Calmet, 14, &c. Remarks 
on Hubert and Goxnarus's opinions, 16. Hebrew Poetry cer- 
tainly capable of comparison with Latin and Greek, 16. Le 
Gere's opinion refuted, 18. Manwaring gives the first Psalm 
in Plebrew scanned, and with the quantities marked, 18. Sca- 
liger's opinion refuted, 19. The Carthaginian scene in Plautus's 
Pcenuius completely Hebrew, and in verse, 20. Scaliger 
contradicts himself, 20. His opinion that some parts of the 
Bible are in .verse, 21. His sentiments examined, 21. Au- 
gustin of Eugubio's opinion examined, 23. Josephus, his 
sentiments stated, 23. St. Jerom, his opinion, 24. Scaliger, 
his opinion that some parts of the Bible are verse noticed, 
26. Scaliger s and St. Jerom's opinions compared, 26. Man- 
waring's opinion as to the nature of Hebrew Poetry, 27* 
The first Psalm, as given by him in the Hebrew language, 


with the quantities marked, objectionable, as to the distribtf* 
tion, because the verses of unequal length, 28. Quantities 
of the feet used in it, 29. The Psalm itself as scanned and 
marked by him, 30. A new regulation and division proposed, 
to make it of more equal length, SI. Poetical Licences do 
not seem to have been used, 32. Bishop Lowth, his opinion 
on Hebrew poetry, 32. Remarks on it, 33. Models of all 
the Greek poetry to be found much earlier among the Jews, 
34. Hexameter verse the earliest among the Jews, as well as 
among the Greeks, 35. Poetry among the Jews may be 
reasonably supposed to have proceeded from inspiration, 36. 

Poetry, Lyric. All Lyric Poetry probably attributable to 
Archilochus, 57. The principles of all borrowed by him 
from the Psalms of David, 58. The very metres of ail these 
sorts actually occur in the Psalms of David, 58. Specimens 
of the sorts of verse which he used, 59, &c. 

Politian began to revise Terence as to the distribution of 
verses, 208. 

Friscian says violations of Prosodia frequent among Dramatic 
Writers, 100. And that Terence used them more than 
others, 100. His system, 282. When he lived, 282. 
Author of the present system, 293. More deference paid 
to it than it merits, 293. His artful method of avoid- 
ing the inquiry whether Comic verse Iambic, 294*. Says 
that Comic writers used Iambic, and introduced into it five 
feet, which he names, 294. Says Iambic verses are either 
Monometers, &c. 295. Comic writers, he says, used princi- 
pally Trimeters and Tetrameters, the rest seldom, 295. They 
also used Trochaic Tetrameter cataiectie, 295. All Comic 
writers use, he says, frequent Licences, 2(^6. But Terence 
more than all, 296. Terence, he says, used Trochaic 
metre, mixed and confused with Iambic, 216. Remarks on 
his system, 297. No one who has tried Priscian's system 
can make it succeed, 301. To remedy its defects they have 
resorted to Poetical Licences, 301. Hare's classification of 
seventeen sorts of Poetical Licences, 302. His opinion that 
Latin Comic verse is Iambic examined, 442. 

Proceleusma admissible in Heroic verse, 114. Specimens of, 
122, 123. Not received by the Grammarians into Iambic 
verse, 130. An example of the Proceleusma in an Iambic 
verse, 130, n. Admissible in Iambic verse, J 32, 


Quintilianus (Aristldes), his sentiments on the three sorts .of 
Rhythmical time, 41, n, 

Quintilian, his opinion of the necessity of a knowledge of 
Music to a Grammarian, 37, n. His idea as to the three sorts 
of Rhythmical time, 40, n. His opinion. that Terence should 
have used Trimeters only, 218. Bentley's objections to this 

©pinion, 218. Remarks on Berkley's objections, 220* 
Quintilian's opinion seems to imply variety of length in the 
verses at present, 225. But the copies corrupt before his 
time, 225. When he lived, 225. 


Jlkt/thmus. Aristotle's opinion as to the three sorts of Rhyth- 
mical time, 38, 39, n. Quintilian's idea on the same subject, 
40, w. Aristides Quintilianus, his sentiments, 41, n, Victo- 
rinus, his opinion, 42, n. Rhythmus and Metre, how they 
differ, 42, n* Diomedes, his opinion as to the three sorts of 
Rhythmical time, 44. Aristotle's idea what Rhythmus should 
be used for public speaking, 258, n. 


Saturnian Verse. Latin Comic metre really Saturnian or Bac- 
chiac, 451. Paul Merula's note in his Commentary on 
Ennius, shows the use and introduction of Saturnian verse, 
451. Observations on it, 454. Nature of Saturnian verse 
described by Terentianus Maurus, 453, n. By Fortunatianus, 
452,?2. By Victorinus, 453, iu By Diomedes, 454. Every 
reason to think Saturnian Bacchiac, 454. Diomedes, his 
definition of the Antibacchius, 454. Specimens of Saturnian 
verse, 455. 

Scaliger, his opinion on the nature of Hebrew Poetry, 15. 
His opinion refuted, 19. Contradicts himself, 20. His 
opinion that some parts of the Bible are in verse, 21, 26, 
His sentiments examined, 23. His opinion and St. Jerom's 
compared, 26. 

Sophocles, an instance from him of a Trochee in Iambic 
verse, 129, n. 

Suidas, an instance of erroneous description from him, 414, n* 

Susarion, the first who furnished poetical performances to the 
people at large, 149. What they probably were, 149. 


Terence, Priscian says, Terence used more violations of 
Prosodia than others, 100. First printed edition of Terence, 
when published, 195. Probably printed from a manuscript 
in the Vatican library, corrected by Calliopius, 197. This 
manuscript of Charlemagne's time, 197. Not known whether 
it was inverse, 199. Fabricius says the earliest editions of 
Terence were in prose, 196, n. 199. Regulation of the verses 
in the printed edition of 1479 and 1499 very faulty, 199. A 
manuscript of Terence, supposed by Fabricius of the seventh 
century, 199. Not known whether that was in verse or prose, 
201. Division of the verses in Terence, as it at present 
stands, but comparatively of modern date, and manifestly 
very corrupt in . itself, 202. Manuscripts searched on this 


point on the present occasion, 203. The earliest of Terence 
are two of the tenth and one of the eleventh century, 203. 
These are all in prose, 204. Two at least of them, if not the 
third, contain a preface, in which Terence is said to be in 
verse, 204. A mistake in the preface, in supposing Callio- 
pius contemporary with Terence, 205. No manuscript of 
Terence in verse, earlier than the thirteenth century, has 
been found, 205. One of the thirteenth, another of the 
fourteenth, another of the fifteenth centuries, in verse, 205. 
Their regulation no better than that of the printed editions 
of 1479 and 1499, 206. No one gives a mode of division that 
can be followed throughout, 206. In detached places they 
may each suggest a more correct distribution, 206. Interval 
of time between dates of the oldest manuscripts and the time 
when Plautus and Terence lived, 207. Copies corrupt in 
Varro's time, 207. Politian began to revise Terence as to 
the distribution of verses, 208. On his death, before Le had 
finished it, Benedictus of Florence completed it, 209. The 
result published by this latter in 1505, and again in 1519, 
209. This arrangement followed by H. Stephens, in 1529, 
209. And by Erasmus, no doubt on the authority of Pris- 
cian, 209. The accuracy of the division itself doubtful, 210. 
Benedictus has mistaken two passages in Aristotle, 210. 
Present division of the verses in Terence not to be relied on, 
because the manuscripts and early printed editions vary from 
each other and from the modern editions, in the division of 
the verses, 212. Three earliest manuscripts of Terence in 
prose, 212. Some printed editions in prose also, 212, n. Ma- 
nuscripts of the thirteenth, fourteenth, and fifteenth centu- 
ries, in verse, 213. Collations of part of Terence's Andria, 
Act I. Sc. 2, with two manuscripts, and the printed editions 
of 1479 and 1499, 213, 214. A similar collation of the An- 
dria, Act I. Sc. 5, in three places, 215, 216. Terence, 
when he lived, 225. Priscian says that Terence used more 
Licences than any "other writer, 296. He also says that Te- 
rence employed Trochaic metre, mixed and confused with 
Iambic, 296. The earliest manuscripts of Terence and 
Plautus supposed of the same age with the Florentine Pan- 
dect, 314. Bentley has ascertained Bacchiac and Cretic 
verses in Plautus and Terence, 460. A new regulation of 
Terence's Andria, Act I. Sc. 2, 462. A new arrangement 
necessary, Andria, Act V. Sc. 1, 464. 
Terentianus Maurus, his sentiments on the question as to the 
admissibility of the Trochee into Iambic verse, 129, n. His 
definition of Iambic verse censured, 402. His account of 
Trochaic catalectic reprehended, 402. His description of 
Iambic in another place, 403. His account of Scazontic 
Iambic, 403. Oi Iambic catalectic Tetrameter, 404. Objec- 
tions to all these, 404. 

K K 


Terpander first set words to music, 141. 

Tetrameter Verse, The Tetrameter verse mentioned by Aris- 
totle, erroneously supposed Trochaic, $5. Aristotle's opi- 
nion that the metre of tragedy changed from Tetrameter, 
258. Some persons have erroneously supposed the Tetra- 
meters he mentions, Trochaic, 259. Objections to the sup- 
position that the Tetrameters were Trochaic, 260. These 
Tetrameters probably Bacchiac, 266. 

Theodorus (Mallius), his opinion as to Choriambic, 405. 
Censured, 405. 

Tihice. Horace's sentiments as to the use of the Tibia, 172. 
Remarks on it, 174. Nature of Tibiae, 182,222. Doubts en- 
tertained as to their nature, 182. Tibiae dextrae et sinistra* 
defined, 183'. Tibiae pares described, 184. Tibiae impares 
explained. 185, Tibiae Sarranae, or Serranae, their nature 
inquired into., 185. 

Tragedy. Aristotle's opinion that the Dithyramb was the origin 
of Tragedy, 84, fi. 264. His idea as to the change of metre 
in Tragedy, 84, n, 258. Tragedy, origin of, 158. Etymo- 
logy of the name, 159. Aristotle's sentiments on the parts 
of Tragedy, 164. Remarks on it, 168. Scarcely possible 
to conclude that the metre employed in the Greek Tragedies 
was any other than Bacchiac Tetrameter, 241. 

Trochaic Verse. Trochaic Tetrameter catalectic used by Ar- 
chilochus, 60. Iambic Trimeter acatalectic intermixed 
with Trochaic Tetrameter acatalectic appears used by 
him, but probably it ought to be arranged as all Trime- 
ters, 63. Iambic and Trochaic verses may be intermixed, 

63. Archilochus uses, on another occasion, Trochaic Tri- 
meter acatalectic and Iambic Trimeter acatalectic together, 

64. He appears to have introduced together with the Tro- 
chaic the Iambic foot also, in the same line, 64. Reasonable 
to do so, 65. Some persons have erroneously supposed the 
Tetrameter, mentioned by Aristotle as used in Tragedy, Tro- 
chaic, 259. Objections to that supposition, 260. Present 
etymology of the term Trochaic objectionable, 263. A bet- 
ter etymology proposed, 263. Priscian says the Comic wri- 
ters used Trochaic Tetrameter catalectic, 295. He says that 
Terence employed Trochaic metre mixed and confused with 
Iambic, 296. Terentianus Maurus's account of Trochaic 
catalectic reprehended, 402. Diomedes, his opinion on 
Trochaic, 406. Another passage from him on Trochaic, 406. 
Objections to these, 406. 

Trochee, not admitted by the Grammarians into Iambic verse, 
128. Admissible in Iambic verse, and no reason for exclud- 
ing it, 131. Instances from iEschylus, Sophocles, and Juba, 
£29, ri. Juba's opinion, 129. 



Varro says the copies of Terence were corrupt before his 
time, 225. 

Verse. Aristotle's opinion that a Poem containing all sorts of 
verse is not a Poem, 22, n. Hexameter originally the only 
kind of verse, 79. Consequently no appropriation of metre 
to particular subjects at that time, 80. Hymns to Bacchus 
originally in that metre, 80. Iambic introduced by Archi- 
lochus, as better suiting Lyric subjects, 80. Paeonic he 
applied to the rites of Bacchus, probably finding the succes- 
sions of syllables better calculated for that sort, 80. Variety 
of verse neither necessary nor proper in itself, 218. Quin- 
tilian's opinion that Terence should have used Trimeters 
only, 21S. Bentley's objections to this opinion, 218. Re- 
marks on Bentley's objections, 220. Verse not necessary to 
express the passions, 220. The Tragedies of George Barn- 
well and The Gamester both in prose, 221. Shakespear, Ben 
Jonson, Milton, used only one kind of verse, 221. Bentley 
ignorant of Music, 222. Victorinus's opinion as to Menan- 
der's change of verse examined, 223. Quintilian's opinion 
seems to imply variety of length at present, 225. Species of 
verse used by the Greek Comic writers, 242. Specimens 
from Eupolis, 243, 244, 245. From Cratinus, 246, 247. 
From Aristophanes, 247. From Philemon, 248, 249. From 
Menander, 250, 252. Bisset's enumeration of sorts of verse 
in Aristophanes's IIXstos, 253. Remarks on the before- 
mentioned specimens, 254. Aristotle's opinion that the 
Metre of Tragedy changed from Tetrameter, 258. Flis sen- 
timents what Rhythmus should be used in speaking, 258, n. 
Some persons have erroneously supposed the Tetrameters he 
mentions, Trochaic, 259. Bishop Hare has interpolated the 
first of the two passages from Aristotle, 259. Objections to 
the supposition that the Tetrameters were Trochaic, 260. 
Present etymology of the term Trochaic objectionable, 263. 
A better etymology proposed, 263. The Tetrameter verse 
mentioned by Aristotle, therefore more probably Bacchiac, 
266. Reasons why Iambic verse not properly applicable to 
Comedy, 271, &c. Greek Comic verse, therefore, probably 
not Iambic, 271. Bacchiac verse, as connected with Bac- 
chus, had a kind of natural connexion with Comedy, 275. 
Strong cause, therefore, for conceiving Greek Comic verse 
Bacchiac, 278. Reasons for conceiving Latin Comic verse 
Bacchiac, 447. Variety of verse in length not allowable, 

Victorinus, his sentiments on the three sorts of Rhythmical 
time, 42, n. His opinion on the question whether the Trochee 
admissible in Iambic verse, 130, n. His sentiments as to 
Menander's change of verse examined, 223. His opinion on 
Choriambic metre, 4.06. Objections to it, 407. His senti- 


ments on Ionic, 407. Objections to them, 407. His opi- 
nion on Phalaecian, 407. Objections to it, 407. His opinion 
as to the admission of the Trochee with the Iambus, 408. 
Remarks on it, 409. Other instances of erroneous descrip- 
tions from Servius and him, 410, 412. 
Virgil, an example from him of an Anapaest in an Heroic 
verse, 117. Four examples from Virgil of an Amphibrachys 
in an Heroic verse, 120, 121. Instances from Virgil of a 
Proceleusma in an Heroic verse, 123. Some supposed in» 
stances of Licences in him explained, 429, &c. 


S, Gosnell, Printer Little Queen Street, London.